I was shocked there wasnt an outbreak in March. All the travel of staff and students back from China for New year, plus plenty of student with have gone skiing and done apres ski, then obviously the high density of people on a campus.
There probably was, but among the young, they weren't getting sick enough to reach hospital (and thus actually get tested. Most Uni's started teaching remotely a week before lock down too.
Eating out is utterly fine if the rules are followed- ie in the same household.
I ate out only in my household. However the table next to us wasn't my household. Or the one behind. Or any of the other tables. The "one household only" and now "rule of 6" nonsense seems to suggest the pox circulates only in the immediate vicinity.
How close next to you were they?
We had a plastic partition between our table and the one next to us. The virus definitely can't circulate over the top of it. Or around it. Or to the tables across the way behind us. If you think "covid secure" has any meaning here go ask a virologist.
Eating out is NOT "utterly fine". Its a managed risk. As is packing the smalls into classrooms. Etc etc.
That sounds a lot more controlled than people meeting in their own houses, doesn't it?
Absolutely. My exposure to the pox would be far greater in my parent's Rochdale living room than it was in a pub with 80 people in it.
That's not the main driver of infections though, is it? I'm talking about parties at home, which the new regs are targeting.
Isn't it? We can't meet more than 6 people from separate households outdoors even but can sit in an air-conditioned pub with 100 people circulating whatever they have in it. Isn't the reality that there have been various examples of house parties and raves going on that they want to crack down on for pour encourages reasons?
I agree that crowded pubs are an issue, but aren't we talking about restaurants here in the context of the deal?
My restaurant of choice was a pub. Its people sat indoors in large numbers at tables. Whats the difference.
The issue isn't the number of people in the room, it is whether they are socially distancing or not.
I can go to a supermarket with hundreds of other shoppers. I stay distanced from them though.
In a supermarket you are wearing a mask though. You have just mentioned social distancing - does the pox not circulate beyond your immediate surrounding suddenly because we want to protect the Great British Boozer? It circulates in the sodding air very effectively especially when air conditioned.
Social distancing will *reduce* immediate spread of the pox. But it doesn't mean no circulation. Yet a load of people circulating past each other in a pub is fine and 7 kids playing football is dangerous.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Yes they did get it wrong...Europe can't lock themselves away like NZ, but encouraging millions of people to go and intermingle all for a week of sunshine was bloody stupid. Afaik, the only European country that had airport testing plus a mandatory quarantine and follow up test is Iceland. That is really the only way you can allow a degree of foreign travel.
I have to say I'd be exceptionally surprised if a new election at this point was part of Cummings' plan.
Getting rid of elections is more likely!
The Internal Market Bill needs to get through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
In the Lords the opposition includes every former Tory Minister that sits there so the act as is isn't going to get through Parliament but it needs to.
So if you can't kill a Parliamentary Session and you can't wait a year to force the bill through how else do you square the circle.
My prediction: Boris will say he has heard MP's concerns, simultaneously putting the bill on hold and declaring a mandate to make concessions to the EU to avoid it ever being required.
Could be.
Johnson's dilemma is that his 40% share of supporters are made up aproximately of 30% loyal Tories and 10% ex Brexit Party including many ex Labour voters.
The 30% of loyal Tories are fraying a bit at the edges with one thing and another, and he'll lose the 10% ex BXP if he concedes too much to the EU. What to do?
He needs Starmer to oppose Brexit so he can rally his supporters. But Starmer refuses to play that game. This latest wheeze is to flush out Starmer. Will he oppose the "destroy WDA" bill or merely abstain? It's a dilemma for Starmer. I suspect he will support Tory amendments to remove the lethal clauses.
Wii Johnson come clean on his cunning strategy to his troops tonight and persuade them not to table amendments and leave it to Labour?
73% of Leave voters voted Conservative at the last general election but only 20% of Remain voters voted Conservative.
So basically if Boris concedes too much to the EU for a soft Brexit trade deal he potentially risks up to 70% of his current vote defecting to the Brexit Party and Farage.
However at most even if he lost all his Remain voters from last time to Starmer and the LDs the Tories would still be on about 36% ie the same voteshare Cameron got in 2015 when UKIP got 12%
A lot of leave voters weren't particularly ardent ideological leavers, though. It's this more fed-up proportion he's going to start losing if he's perceived to be backtracking on the election promise to "get Brexit done" as simply as can be - and also crucially just to be gone away, rather than only to be conducted as ideologically purely as possible.
Maybe some but while 73% of Leave voters see leaving with no deal as acceptable only 42% of Leave voters see remaining in the single market and customs union as acceptable for instance
So 70% of the population would have been OK with SM+CU. Yet the Tories never offered a compromise on those lines. Why not?
54% found leaving the EU but staying in the SM and CU acceptable, though not as high as 70% no.
The Tories refused to do that because as I already pointed out about 2/3 of their voters came from Leave voters who would have defected en masse to Farage and the Brexit Party if the Tories had conceded on SM and CU and allowed free movement and prevented UK trade deals and failed to regain control of our fishing waters.
We would have ended up with a similar result as we got at the 2019 European elections with the Tories 4th or 5th behind the Brexit Party, Labour, the LDs and even the SNP and Greens.
The Tories would have faced the fate of their Canadian sister party the Progressive Conservatives in 1993 and been replaced as the main party of the right by a populist rightwing party with the Brexit Party becoming the equivalent of the Canadian Reform Party (which ultimately took over the carcass of the remaining Canadian Tory Party to form today's Conservative Party of Canada in 2003)
Thanks for confirming that the decision reflected putting the interests of the party ahead of the country. Let's have no more of this "if only the Remainers had been willing to compromise" bollox. A compromise has always been available, it has never been offered.
If Remainers want EEA as a soft Brexit compromise they can vote for Starmer or Davey in 2024 as they are both moving in that direction anyway, the Tories are now committed to hard Brexit for a generation
So will you be voting for Starmer or Davey?
No, as I believe Brexit now has to be delivered in full
So I was right. It is as I feared. Your political ideals, such as they are (they are nothing more than a chimera) chop and change with the seasons. A dilettante who has no firm convictions.
I really like your contributions and you are king of the poll commentary.
But I find it difficult to respect that tbh. Are you not embarrassed?
No, I am a Tory Party branch chairman and you know my loyalty to the party comes first.
Plus I respect the fact Leave won and the platform it won on, however if Starmer becomes PM in 2024 and takes us back into the EEA as a democrat I would accept that too
Does there not come a time when your principles, such as they were, are more important than your position. You are not being straight with them when you say you support a hard Brexit (or rather, I bet, you keep quiet about it). Because you don't. You are involved in local politics, which is great and an admirable thing but you are like "all the rest" in that you say one thing and think another.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
I'm conflicted on this. I don't want a trade deal with Trump's America but I do want one if he's gone. So if it were the case that we only get one with him as POTUS that's me stymied. What a world.
Trump did not invent chlorinated chicken or secret tribunals. Whether or not it's Trump's America we go for an FTA with, will make little material difference to the deal (imo).
There is zero chance of any US UK FTA if Biden is President and/or Pelosi Speaker of the House next year if Boris goes ahead and removes the border in the Irish Sea (despite the fact the Dems seem unable to understand Boris still wants no border within Ireland)
I'm quite sure the Dems understand that Boris doesn't want a border within Ireland. What they can't get their head round, nor can anyone sensible, is why he seems to want to torpedo the agreement he ratified nine months ago which would have made it possible to avoid such a border.
The honest truth is because that agreement does exactly what almost everyone said it did at the time but which Boris denied with bluster, diversion and pretty straightforward lies.
They started a second uptick in July, yet the hospital rates remain low. Why are ministers blindly following Ferguson and Whitty and their model? We have a real world example to follow where none of Ferguson's predictions has happened.
Because Ferguson is a genius at self-publicising fearmongering. If you can be good at that, people forget that none of your predictions come true.
The piece by Nelson is indeed superb. I'm not normally a fan – but Nelson is better informed than most thanks to getting serious pros like Prof Carl Heneghan on his show. Required reading.
I was shocked there wasnt an outbreak in March. All the travel of staff and students back from China for New year, plus plenty of student with have gone skiing and done apres ski, then obviously the high density of people on a campus.
There probably was, but among the young, they weren't getting sick enough to reach hospital (and thus actually get tested. Most Uni's started teaching remotely a week before lock down too.
I think even with that, early on there was contact tracing and a reasonable idea of where hotspots were and what caused them. I don't remember ever reading that one was related to a university and also remember unis are essentially small towns, not just the students lots of old academic staff plus loads of adult support staff. If it was rampant on a campus, I think it would has struck down enough of the more vulnerable to end up being flagged.
I have to say I'd be exceptionally surprised if a new election at this point was part of Cummings' plan.
Getting rid of elections is more likely!
The Internal Market Bill needs to get through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
In the Lords the opposition includes every former Tory Minister that sits there so the act as is isn't going to get through Parliament but it needs to.
So if you can't kill a Parliamentary Session and you can't wait a year to force the bill through how else do you square the circle.
My prediction: Boris will say he has heard MP's concerns, simultaneously putting the bill on hold and declaring a mandate to make concessions to the EU to avoid it ever being required.
Could be.
Johnson's dilemma is that his 40% share of supporters are made up aproximately of 30% loyal Tories and 10% ex Brexit Party including many ex Labour voters.
The 30% of loyal Tories are fraying a bit at the edges with one thing and another, and he'll lose the 10% ex BXP if he concedes too much to the EU. What to do?
He needs Starmer to oppose Brexit so he can rally his supporters. But Starmer refuses to play that game. This latest wheeze is to flush out Starmer. Will he oppose the "destroy WDA" bill or merely abstain? It's a dilemma for Starmer. I suspect he will support Tory amendments to remove the lethal clauses.
Wii Johnson come clean on his cunning strategy to his troops tonight and persuade them not to table amendments and leave it to Labour?
73% of Leave voters voted Conservative at the last general election but only 20% of Remain voters voted Conservative.
So basically if Boris concedes too much to the EU for a soft Brexit trade deal he potentially risks up to 70% of his current vote defecting to the Brexit Party and Farage.
However at most even if he lost all his Remain voters from last time to Starmer and the LDs the Tories would still be on about 36% ie the same voteshare Cameron got in 2015 when UKIP got 12%
A lot of leave voters weren't particularly ardent ideological leavers, though. It's this more fed-up proportion he's going to start losing if he's perceived to be backtracking on the election promise to "get Brexit done" as simply as can be - and also crucially just to be gone away, rather than only to be conducted as ideologically purely as possible.
Maybe some but while 73% of Leave voters see leaving with no deal as acceptable only 42% of Leave voters see remaining in the single market and customs union as acceptable for instance
So 70% of the population would have been OK with SM+CU. Yet the Tories never offered a compromise on those lines. Why not?
54% found leaving the EU but staying in the SM and CU acceptable, though not as high as 70% no.
The Tories refused to do that because as I already pointed out about 2/3 of their voters came from Leave voters who would have defected en masse to Farage and the Brexit Party if the Tories had conceded on SM and CU and allowed free movement and prevented UK trade deals and failed to regain control of our fishing waters.
We would have ended up with a similar result as we got at the 2019 European elections with the Tories 4th or 5th behind the Brexit Party, Labour, the LDs and even the SNP and Greens.
The Tories would have faced the fate of their Canadian sister party the Progressive Conservatives in 1993 and been replaced as the main party of the right by a populist rightwing party with the Brexit Party becoming the equivalent of the Canadian Reform Party (which ultimately took over the carcass of the remaining Canadian Tory Party to form today's Conservative Party of Canada in 2003)
Thanks for confirming that the decision reflected putting the interests of the party ahead of the country. Let's have no more of this "if only the Remainers had been willing to compromise" bollox. A compromise has always been available, it has never been offered.
If Remainers want EEA as a soft Brexit compromise they can vote for Starmer or Davey in 2024 as they are both moving in that direction anyway, the Tories are now committed to hard Brexit for a generation
So will you be voting for Starmer or Davey?
No, as I believe Brexit now has to be delivered in full
So I was right. It is as I feared. Your political ideals, such as they are (they are nothing more than a chimera) chop and change with the seasons. A dilettante who has no firm convictions.
I really like your contributions and you are king of the poll commentary.
But I find it difficult to respect that tbh. Are you not embarrassed?
No, I am a Tory Party branch chairman and you know my loyalty to the party comes first.
Mark 8:36: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
Is the risk really higher at a restaurant with proper distancing?
If it's the same group either eating out or meeting in each others' houses, logically eating out has to be higher risk as it involves third parties.
There is a case to be made for limiting the number of interactions rather than the type. eg you can meet up to four households each week and can choose whether it is four households in one go or the same other household four times, one household then three households etc. You can also choose whether to meet in restaurants or the home.
But this would too much social control so we have a more arbitrary system.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Clearly we did. It was doable but it required quarantine for everyone who had been abroad for 2 weeks (or until they got a negative test, if sooner). It really wasn't rocket science.
We are back to where we were in March. The increases are built in and going to be almost impossible to stop. Our testing regime still can't cope. The "insta test" is still an aspiration but not a reality. We cannot afford full lockdown again and we have seen the horrendous implications for education. We need to lead more normal lives even if it means that several tens of thousands more will die. Which they will.
There were no good options here but there were certainly less bad ones.
Eating out is utterly fine if the rules are followed- ie in the same household.
I ate out only in my household. However the table next to us wasn't my household. Or the one behind. Or any of the other tables. The "one household only" and now "rule of 6" nonsense seems to suggest the pox circulates only in the immediate vicinity.
How close next to you were they?
We had a plastic partition between our table and the one next to us. The virus definitely can't circulate over the top of it. Or around it. Or to the tables across the way behind us. If you think "covid secure" has any meaning here go ask a virologist.
Eating out is NOT "utterly fine". Its a managed risk. As is packing the smalls into classrooms. Etc etc.
That sounds a lot more controlled than people meeting in their own houses, doesn't it?
Absolutely. My exposure to the pox would be far greater in my parent's Rochdale living room than it was in a pub with 80 people in it.
That's not the main driver of infections though, is it? I'm talking about parties at home, which the new regs are targeting.
Isn't it? We can't meet more than 6 people from separate households outdoors even but can sit in an air-conditioned pub with 100 people circulating whatever they have in it. Isn't the reality that there have been various examples of house parties and raves going on that they want to crack down on for pour encourages reasons?
I agree that crowded pubs are an issue, but aren't we talking about restaurants here in the context of the deal?
My restaurant of choice was a pub. Its people sat indoors in large numbers at tables. Whats the difference.
The issue isn't the number of people in the room, it is whether they are socially distancing or not.
I can go to a supermarket with hundreds of other shoppers. I stay distanced from them though.
In a supermarket you are wearing a mask though. You have just mentioned social distancing - does the pox not circulate beyond your immediate surrounding suddenly because we want to protect the Great British Boozer? It circulates in the sodding air very effectively especially when air conditioned.
Social distancing will *reduce* immediate spread of the pox. But it doesn't mean no circulation. Yet a load of people circulating past each other in a pub is fine and 7 kids playing football is dangerous.
Are we answering based on what we want it to be, or what the evidence shows?
The evidence shows that yes it is circulating within your immediate surroundings, so having a separate family on a table elsewhere in the room that is distanced from you is pretty safe - having family in your living room close to you is not.
Do I wish it was the other way around? Yes, of course. But that isn't what the science is saying at the minute.
What proportion of these new cases are actually sick?
If they are disproportionately youngsters, I dare say that most would probably be none the wiser were it not for that fact that they had been tested.
Likely a smaller fraction than at the peak. The reports suggest it is being driven by infections in the youngest age group (18-24).
It's worth remembering, of course, that at the peak maybe 10% of cases were caught by testing. It's probably 60% now. And the average age of the infected is much lower now. Put those two together, and it's pretty obvious why we're not seeing a surge in hospitalisations.
Yesterday someone posted some research on masks, suggesting that they resulted in lower viral loads, and therefore less severe infections. It will be interesting to see if this is true.
I have to say I'd be exceptionally surprised if a new election at this point was part of Cummings' plan.
Getting rid of elections is more likely!
The Internal Market Bill needs to get through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
In the Lords the opposition includes every former Tory Minister that sits there so the act as is isn't going to get through Parliament but it needs to.
So if you can't kill a Parliamentary Session and you can't wait a year to force the bill through how else do you square the circle.
My prediction: Boris will say he has heard MP's concerns, simultaneously putting the bill on hold and declaring a mandate to make concessions to the EU to avoid it ever being required.
Could be.
Johnson's dilemma is that his 40% share of supporters are made up aproximately of 30% loyal Tories and 10% ex Brexit Party including many ex Labour voters.
The 30% of loyal Tories are fraying a bit at the edges with one thing and another, and he'll lose the 10% ex BXP if he concedes too much to the EU. What to do?
He needs Starmer to oppose Brexit so he can rally his supporters. But Starmer refuses to play that game. This latest wheeze is to flush out Starmer. Will he oppose the "destroy WDA" bill or merely abstain? It's a dilemma for Starmer. I suspect he will support Tory amendments to remove the lethal clauses.
Wii Johnson come clean on his cunning strategy to his troops tonight and persuade them not to table amendments and leave it to Labour?
73% of Leave voters voted Conservative at the last general election but only 20% of Remain voters voted Conservative.
So basically if Boris concedes too much to the EU for a soft Brexit trade deal he potentially risks up to 70% of his current vote defecting to the Brexit Party and Farage.
However at most even if he lost all his Remain voters from last time to Starmer and the LDs the Tories would still be on about 36% ie the same voteshare Cameron got in 2015 when UKIP got 12%
A lot of leave voters weren't particularly ardent ideological leavers, though. It's this more fed-up proportion he's going to start losing if he's perceived to be backtracking on the election promise to "get Brexit done" as simply as can be - and also crucially just to be gone away, rather than only to be conducted as ideologically purely as possible.
Maybe some but while 73% of Leave voters see leaving with no deal as acceptable only 42% of Leave voters see remaining in the single market and customs union as acceptable for instance
So 70% of the population would have been OK with SM+CU. Yet the Tories never offered a compromise on those lines. Why not?
54% found leaving the EU but staying in the SM and CU acceptable, though not as high as 70% no.
The Tories refused to do that because as I already pointed out about 2/3 of their voters came from Leave voters who would have defected en masse to Farage and the Brexit Party if the Tories had conceded on SM and CU and allowed free movement and prevented UK trade deals and failed to regain control of our fishing waters.
We would have ended up with a similar result as we got at the 2019 European elections with the Tories 4th or 5th behind the Brexit Party, Labour, the LDs and even the SNP and Greens.
The Tories would have faced the fate of their Canadian sister party the Progressive Conservatives in 1993 and been replaced as the main party of the right by a populist rightwing party with the Brexit Party becoming the equivalent of the Canadian Reform Party (which ultimately took over the carcass of the remaining Canadian Tory Party to form today's Conservative Party of Canada in 2003)
Thanks for confirming that the decision reflected putting the interests of the party ahead of the country. Let's have no more of this "if only the Remainers had been willing to compromise" bollox. A compromise has always been available, it has never been offered.
If Remainers want EEA as a soft Brexit compromise they can vote for Starmer or Davey in 2024 as they are both moving in that direction anyway, the Tories are now committed to hard Brexit for a generation
So will you be voting for Starmer or Davey?
No, as I believe Brexit now has to be delivered in full
So I was right. It is as I feared. Your political ideals, such as they are (they are nothing more than a chimera) chop and change with the seasons. A dilettante who has no firm convictions.
I really like your contributions and you are king of the poll commentary.
But I find it difficult to respect that tbh. Are you not embarrassed?
No, I am a Tory Party branch chairman and you know my loyalty to the party comes first.
Is the risk really higher at a restaurant with proper distancing?
If it's the same group either eating out or meeting in each others' houses, logically eating out has to be higher risk as it involves third parties.
There is a case to be made for limiting the number of interactions rather than the type. eg you can meet up to four households each week and can choose whether it is four households in one go or the same other household four times, one household then three households etc. You can also choose whether to meet in restaurants or the home.
But this would too much social control so we have a more arbitrary system.
I believe government advice had always been to limit number of different households you come into contact with, but has got lost in the ever changing (and differing national / local) rules.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Clearly we did. It was doable but it required quarantine for everyone who had been abroad for 2 weeks (or until they got a negative test, is sooner). It really wasn't rocket science.
We are back to where we were in March. The increases are built in and going to be almost impossible to stop. Our testing regime still can't cope. The "insta test" is still an aspiration but not a reality. We cannot afford full lockdown again and we have seen the horrendous implications for education. We need to lead more normal lives even if it means that several tens of thousands more will die. Which they will.
There were no good options here but there were certainly less bad ones.
We're not back where we were in March, because in March we missed 90% of infections.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
I'm conflicted on this. I don't want a trade deal with Trump's America but I do want one if he's gone. So if it were the case that we only get one with him as POTUS that's me stymied. What a world.
Trump did not invent chlorinated chicken or secret tribunals. Whether or not it's Trump's America we go for an FTA with, will make little material difference to the deal (imo).
Ok, but I'm afraid I now associate him with every bad thing about the USA. He's actually quite useful like that. I think of an aspect of America or American life and I ask myself "Does Donald Trump like or embody this particular thing?" If the answer is yes, QED, it means it's something I ought to dislike, and in all cases it turns out that I do dislike it. 100% match up. It really does work. Guess you're the same though. Nothing special about me in this regard.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Yes they did get it wrong...Europe can't lock themselves away like NZ, but encouraging millions of people to go and intermingle all for a week of sunshine was bloody stupid. Afaik, the only European country that had airport testing plus a mandatory quarantine and follow up test is Iceland. That is really the only way you can allow a degree of foreign travel.
Although the beaches are probably safer than Brighton was, It wasn’t the fact that they went abroad it was how they behaved when they got here, stupidly allowed by the authorities, packing into discos without mask and distancing being enforced. If they had come to sit by the pool, have a meal out and a few sensible distanced beers it would have been better for all.
One other thing about domestic vs foreign travel. It is much easier to a) notice outbreaks and b) trace it from within the UK.
When a flight comes back from Athens and two weeks later we find one of them has covid, nearly impossible to trace. Did they get it in Greece, airport, the plane, back home? Who did they come into contact with in Greece, when, where, etc etc etc.
Eating out is utterly fine if the rules are followed- ie in the same household.
I ate out only in my household. However the table next to us wasn't my household. Or the one behind. Or any of the other tables. The "one household only" and now "rule of 6" nonsense seems to suggest the pox circulates only in the immediate vicinity.
How close next to you were they?
We had a plastic partition between our table and the one next to us. The virus definitely can't circulate over the top of it. Or around it. Or to the tables across the way behind us. If you think "covid secure" has any meaning here go ask a virologist.
Eating out is NOT "utterly fine". Its a managed risk. As is packing the smalls into classrooms. Etc etc.
That sounds a lot more controlled than people meeting in their own houses, doesn't it?
Absolutely. My exposure to the pox would be far greater in my parent's Rochdale living room than it was in a pub with 80 people in it.
That's not the main driver of infections though, is it? I'm talking about parties at home, which the new regs are targeting.
Isn't it? We can't meet more than 6 people from separate households outdoors even but can sit in an air-conditioned pub with 100 people circulating whatever they have in it. Isn't the reality that there have been various examples of house parties and raves going on that they want to crack down on for pour encourages reasons?
I agree that crowded pubs are an issue, but aren't we talking about restaurants here in the context of the deal?
My restaurant of choice was a pub. Its people sat indoors in large numbers at tables. Whats the difference.
The issue isn't the number of people in the room, it is whether they are socially distancing or not.
I can go to a supermarket with hundreds of other shoppers. I stay distanced from them though.
In a supermarket you are wearing a mask though. You have just mentioned social distancing - does the pox not circulate beyond your immediate surrounding suddenly because we want to protect the Great British Boozer? It circulates in the sodding air very effectively especially when air conditioned.
Social distancing will *reduce* immediate spread of the pox. But it doesn't mean no circulation. Yet a load of people circulating past each other in a pub is fine and 7 kids playing football is dangerous.
Are we answering based on what we want it to be, or what the evidence shows?
The evidence shows that yes it is circulating within your immediate surroundings, so having a separate family on a table elsewhere in the room that is distanced from you is pretty safe - having family in your living room close to you is not.
Do I wish it was the other way around? Yes, of course. But that isn't what the science is saying at the minute.
But it's the same family members in their living room as would be sat at a table in a pub. What are you on about?
Even if it was 7 family members sat at home at a big dining room table how is the potential pox or just 7 more of a risk than 6 of them going to a restaurant and getting the potential pox of scores?
I'm conflicted on this. I don't want a trade deal with Trump's America but I do want one if he's gone. So if it were the case that we only get one with him as POTUS that's me stymied. What a world.
Trump did not invent chlorinated chicken or secret tribunals. Whether or not it's Trump's America we go for an FTA with, will make little material difference to the deal (imo).
There is zero chance of any US UK FTA if Biden is President and/or Pelosi Speaker of the House next year if Boris goes ahead and removes the border in the Irish Sea (despite the fact the Dems seem unable to understand Boris still wants no border within Ireland)
Good.
Really? You'd be happy with no UK/EU deal and no UK/US deal? Crazy.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Yes they did get it wrong...Europe can't lock themselves away like NZ, but encouraging millions of people to go and intermingle all for a week of sunshine was bloody stupid. Afaik, the only European country that had airport testing plus a mandatory quarantine and follow up test is Iceland. That is really the only way you can allow a degree of foreign travel.
Although the beaches are probably safer than Brighton was, It wasn’t the fact that they went abroad it was how they behaved when they got here, stupidly allowed by the authorities, packing into discos without mask and distancing being enforced. If they had come to sit by the pool, have a meal out and a few sensible distanced beers it would have been better for all.
Certainly, but what did everybody expect. Also, i don't know how good idea sitting in an airport for 3hrs is either, especially abroad with the aircon.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Clearly we did. It was doable but it required quarantine for everyone who had been abroad for 2 weeks (or until they got a negative test, is sooner). It really wasn't rocket science.
We are back to where we were in March. The increases are built in and going to be almost impossible to stop. Our testing regime still can't cope. The "insta test" is still an aspiration but not a reality. We cannot afford full lockdown again and we have seen the horrendous implications for education. We need to lead more normal lives even if it means that several tens of thousands more will die. Which they will.
There were no good options here but there were certainly less bad ones.
We're not back where we were in March, because in March we missed 90% of infections.
But we still have no control. We have large numbers of infections where the source is not obvious. The virus is at large in the community and untraced. And we have a geometric progression in the increase in the number of cases because all of our testing, isolation, tracing etc is not reducing the R rate to less than 1, not even close.
Next week we will be averaging over 3k new cases a day. The week after? I am not optimistic.
Is the risk really higher at a restaurant with proper distancing?
If it's the same group either eating out or meeting in each others' houses, logically eating out has to be higher risk as it involves third parties.
There is a case to be made for limiting the number of interactions rather than the type. eg you can meet up to four households each week and can choose whether it is four households in one go or the same other household four times, one household then three households etc. You can also choose whether to meet in restaurants or the home.
But this would too much social control so we have a more arbitrary system.
I believe government advice had always been to limit number of different households you come into contact with, but has got lost in the ever changing (and differing national / local) rules.
Surely one of the biggest risks of infection is through the workplace, so I really struggle to understand why the government is so keen to get people back into offices again rather than encouraging as much home working as possible.
The Imperial study makes it fairly clear why hospitalisations etc have not yet risen along with reported infections:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/203873/largest-covid19-testing-study-shows-cases/ ... Young people aged 18-24 were also significantly more likely to be infected than all other age groups (0.25% prevalence, up from 0.08% between 24th July and 11th August), while the lowest rates were found in those aged 65 and above (0.04%). ..
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
Yes they did get it wrong...Europe can't lock themselves away like NZ, but encouraging millions of people to go and intermingle all for a week of sunshine was bloody stupid. Afaik, the only European country that had airport testing plus a mandatory quarantine and follow up test is Iceland. That is really the only way you can allow a degree of foreign travel.
Although the beaches are probably safer than Brighton was, It wasn’t the fact that they went abroad it was how they behaved when they got here, stupidly allowed by the authorities, packing into discos without mask and distancing being enforced. If they had come to sit by the pool, have a meal out and a few sensible distanced beers it would have been better for all.
Certainly, but what did everybody expect. Also, i don't know how good idea sitting in an airport for 3hrs is either, especially abroad with the aircon.
And the plane as you don’t know how your fellow passengers have behaved.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
Anecdata alert: we just went up to the Catskills for a couple of nights’ break. We stayed off the main highways for a more scenic drive, and so we passed through a lot of the very rural, and so much more Republican-leaning parts of New York State. Here is our count of election yard signs / flags etc.
Biden: 1 Trump: 1 “Bye Don” (geddit.): 1 Trump flag but upside down: 1 No bumper stickers were seen at all.
The election yard signs etc were outnumbered by Black Lives Matters signs, and those were outnumbered by “Thank you essential workers” signs.
Yes, NYS will go heavily Democratic as a whole, but I was quite surprised to see such a small amount of overt Trump support in the countryside. That said, there were very few yard signs out in 2016, compared to 2012. I guess most people feel the polarizarion of views here in the US and don’t want to expose themselves one way or another.
That's interesting. I love the Bye Don sign.
There were only two houses signalling on BLM in my villages. They had their signs up for ages, but they all came down by the August BH weekend.
The NHS worshipping rainbows are still all over the place of course.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
But we are going to have a Dad's Army enforcing our new rules, unlike Johnny Foreigner :-)
Eating out is utterly fine if the rules are followed- ie in the same household.
I ate out only in my household. However the table next to us wasn't my household. Or the one behind. Or any of the other tables. The "one household only" and now "rule of 6" nonsense seems to suggest the pox circulates only in the immediate vicinity.
How close next to you were they?
We had a plastic partition between our table and the one next to us. The virus definitely can't circulate over the top of it. Or around it. Or to the tables across the way behind us. If you think "covid secure" has any meaning here go ask a virologist.
Eating out is NOT "utterly fine". Its a managed risk. As is packing the smalls into classrooms. Etc etc.
That sounds a lot more controlled than people meeting in their own houses, doesn't it?
Absolutely. My exposure to the pox would be far greater in my parent's Rochdale living room than it was in a pub with 80 people in it.
That's not the main driver of infections though, is it? I'm talking about parties at home, which the new regs are targeting.
Isn't it? We can't meet more than 6 people from separate households outdoors even but can sit in an air-conditioned pub with 100 people circulating whatever they have in it. Isn't the reality that there have been various examples of house parties and raves going on that they want to crack down on for pour encourages reasons?
I agree that crowded pubs are an issue, but aren't we talking about restaurants here in the context of the deal?
My restaurant of choice was a pub. Its people sat indoors in large numbers at tables. Whats the difference.
The issue isn't the number of people in the room, it is whether they are socially distancing or not.
I can go to a supermarket with hundreds of other shoppers. I stay distanced from them though.
In a supermarket you are wearing a mask though. You have just mentioned social distancing - does the pox not circulate beyond your immediate surrounding suddenly because we want to protect the Great British Boozer? It circulates in the sodding air very effectively especially when air conditioned.
Social distancing will *reduce* immediate spread of the pox. But it doesn't mean no circulation. Yet a load of people circulating past each other in a pub is fine and 7 kids playing football is dangerous.
Are we answering based on what we want it to be, or what the evidence shows?
The evidence shows that yes it is circulating within your immediate surroundings, so having a separate family on a table elsewhere in the room that is distanced from you is pretty safe - having family in your living room close to you is not.
Do I wish it was the other way around? Yes, of course. But that isn't what the science is saying at the minute.
But it's the same family members in their living room as would be sat at a table in a pub. What are you on about?
Even if it was 7 family members sat at home at a big dining room table how is the potential pox or just 7 more of a risk than 6 of them going to a restaurant and getting the potential pox of scores?
Because the evidence shows it is a lack of social distancing and big groups at homes that is spreading the virus.
You can ask the question as many ways as you want but that is what the data is showing. The NHS is identifying and tracing 60% of all infections and the overwhelming evidence - as reported by the Scottish government as well as the UK one - is that the spread is occurring in homes and non-socially distanced events and not at socially distanced restaurants.
I would love to know what the analysts for England cricket tell Archer. Naively when he bowls 90+ mph he is unplayable, but again he has come back on, Australia 5 down and bowling 70-85mph deliveries.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
Yep - but Boris wasn't bright enough to see thatr.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
Yes at some point governments are going to have to say that people will have to manage their own risk.
If they continue to release accurate updates in each area it will allow people to make an informed decision about whether to isolate or not.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
As I posted earlier. This piece by Fraser Nelson should be widely read.
Sweden is the answer - not massive draconian lockdown until next March.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
I think ministers are being badly advised. Can we get Carl Hennigan on to SAGE asap please?
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Need action on care homes though, in all countries
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
What proportion of these new cases are actually sick?
If they are disproportionately youngsters, I dare say that most would probably be none the wiser were it not for that fact that they had been tested.
I find this all a bit puzzling. A few weeks ago we had a problem within my nearest large town, Northampton. A single company had 300+ workers test positive. However, it came to light that 200+ were tested positive only by the comapny itself - i.e. it was private testing - and a few days later the company announced it was repeating the tests (as it suspected false positives). These workers by on large were not aware they had it and there has, to my knowledge, been no impact on local hospital admissions.
So a few questions arise from this in addition to the one you raise. Are private tests included in the official figures? The answer must be yes because official figure showed a spike in Northampton. How reliable are these private tests? When the company re-tested did those that tested positive a second time go on official figures again (i.e. were double-counted)?
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I wonder if you'd been born in the mediterranean, LadySean, you'd be more of an optimist. My greek and italian friends are seeing things very differently, so far - and I personally think they may be right.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
Yes at some point governments are going to have to say that people will have to manage their own risk.
If they continue to release accurate updates in each area it will allow people to make an informed decision about whether to isolate or not.
Yes.
One excellent step the government could take is show the infection distribution by region and AGE GROUP.
What is happening is that we are massively overplaying the risks to the young and fit, and underplaying the risks to the old and unfit.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
I think ministers are being badly advised. Can we get Carl Hennigan on to SAGE asap please?
Yes, it remains odd that Heneghan, who has got every call right, and who actually forced government to change its absurd way of measuring covid deaths, isn't lead advisor by now.
In fact, thinking about it, maybe that's why he isn't – he exposed PHE as innumerate.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
We only get driven inside on about 20 days a year, Eating out will move predominately to lunch but the bars and restaurants are already Struggling, too much capacity too few customers without the late holiday makers and second homers.
Sweden. Two or three people are day roughly are dying from/with the virus.
Couple of hundred cases a day.
But everyone said Tegnell was wrong.
"Tegnell had told me the first time we spoke in the spring that it would be in the autumn when it became more apparent how successful each country had been."
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
Made infinitely worse by your hourly disaster pornography.
Go crack open a Barolo and start wanking on about Europe, please.
What proportion of these new cases are actually sick?
If they are disproportionately youngsters, I dare say that most would probably be none the wiser were it not for that fact that they had been tested.
Wrong - people were saying that a few weeks ago in Spain - more than 100,000 cases later - hospitalisations and deaths are steadily climbing. You have been warned - as i did on here at the time.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I wonder if you'd been born in the mediterranean, LadySean, you'd be more of an optimist. My greek and italian friends are seeing things very differently, so far - and I personally think they may be right.
I've just come back from Greece. My impression was quite different - and I talked to a lot of people (admittedly mainly in the travel industry). Most were pessimistic, some were in despair.
One other thing I noted was how pleased they were to see Brits. I heard that on multiple occasions. They want us to return, in numbers.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I knew this was going to happen but hoped to get through September before the screw tightened. We have to find a way to live with the virus in the medium term. Which means much better hygiene, elimination of risks, choices of what activities are important and loads of highly effective testing. Which then allows us to do more of the normal stuff.
Needless to say, governments have done none of this planning, which they have shared with the public. Johnson's government, although particularly inattentive, is by no means alone.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
What proportion of these new cases are actually sick?
If they are disproportionately youngsters, I dare say that most would probably be none the wiser were it not for that fact that they had been tested.
Wrong - people were saying that a few weeks ago in Spain - more than 100,000 cases later - hospitalisations and deaths are steadily climbing. You have been warned - as i did on here at the time.
Sorry, what in my post was wrong? I asked a question.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I wonder if you'd been born in the mediterranean, LadySean, you'd be more of an optimist. My greek and italian friends are seeing things very differently, so far - and I personally think they may be right.
I've just come back from Greece. My impression was quite different - and I talked to a lot of people (admittedly mainly in the travel industry). Most were pessimistic, some were in despair.
One other thing I noted was how pleased they were to see Brits. I heard that on multiple occasions. They want us to return, in numbers.
Yes. Some Greeks are tending to slightly identify with Britain outside the EU mainstream at the moment, but still nevertheless very much wanting to stay within the EU, unlike the Brexiters. Those I know are in despair about the economy, but take a very different view about learning to live with virus, and the future trajectory of it. The same seems to apply to the Italians I know, and I'm not sure of the reasons for the difference.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
The point is that everyone would know that on January 1st, 2021, there would be no tariffs even without a trade deal. Johnson's deal just recreated the Article 50 cliff edge.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I wonder if you'd been born in the mediterranean, LadySean, you'd be more of an optimist. My greek and italian friends are seeing things very differently, so far - and I personally think they may be right.
I've just come back from Greece. My impression was quite different - and I talked to a lot of people (admittedly mainly in the travel industry). Most were pessimistic, some were in despair.
One other thing I noted was how pleased they were to see Brits. I heard that on multiple occasions. They want us to return, in numbers.
For the money, even if they have to clean the pavements every night.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
The point is that everyone would know that on January 1st, 2021, there would be no tariffs even without a trade deal. Johnson's deal just recreated the Article 50 cliff edge.
Only if we stuck to EU rules, which we're not going to do.
Johnson's deal recreated the A50 cliff edge because we wanted the cliff edge there.
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Austria, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
Again - we are at a different stage (by we, I include Spain and France etc). We are all testing way more. The hospitals are not overflowing and exceeding capacity. I accept that this a lagging indicator, but as about, the rate increase in the UK is mainly among the young, who won't get severely ill, won't need to go to hospital and so on.
Deaths and hospitalisations are, now, slowly ticking up again in Spain and France. Clearly nowhere near as bad as the spring, but we are only in september. Once the normal flu season kicks in AS WELL, and the weather seriously worsens - driving everyone indoors - then, depressingly, I can see European governments closing down all the pubs and restaurants once more, and so on, and so forth.
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
I wonder if you'd been born in the mediterranean, LadySean, you'd be more of an optimist. My greek and italian friends are seeing things very differently, so far - and I personally think they may be right.
I've just come back from Greece. My impression was quite different - and I talked to a lot of people (admittedly mainly in the travel industry). Most were pessimistic, some were in despair.
One other thing I noted was how pleased they were to see Brits. I heard that on multiple occasions. They want us to return, in numbers.
For the money, even if they have to clean the pavements every night.
Of course, but it is still nice to be eagerly welcomed. It happened too often to be coincidence.
The immensely infuriating thing is that now would be the perfect time for the government to pursue a herd immunity strategy. Most of the people contracting coronavirus are young and healthy. The risk for healthy under 40s is essentially comparable to influenza - it's not an exact comparison, but there were 52 flu deaths in the under 40 bracket in 2018 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/970800/influenza-deaths-by-age-and-gender-england-wales/), and 224 deaths *with* Covid in the under 40 bracket in 2020, 85% of whom had a preexisting condition (https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/coronavirus-tragic-number-young-healthy-18471098). I recognise it isn't politically viable, but if we wanted to get back to normal as fast as possible, we should be taking advantage of the fact that the virus is spreading in the least vulnerable population bracket. Sequester the old and vulnerable for 6 weeks, let young people behave as normal and catch the virus, pay the families of anyone under 40 that dies of the virus £1 million in compensation and at the end of it half the population will have immunity for a fraction of the cost of continued lockdown and track and trace.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
That May Deal just keeps looking better and better. I'm proud to have supported it on here despite my Labour leanings and my passionate Remain vote in the Referendum. It says a lot about me as a person and all of it good.
Sweden. Two or three people are day roughly are dying from/with the virus.
Couple of hundred cases a day.
But everyone said Tegnell was wrong.
"Tegnell had told me the first time we spoke in the spring that it would be in the autumn when it became more apparent how successful each country had been."
I detest what Boris and Cummings have done over the WA. It's a disgrace.
But I also can't stand Nancy Pelosi. The hectoring glee with which she loves to lecture the UK whenever she has an opportunity.
A real un-diplomatic Britain hater.
The UK needs to sort out the arrangement with the EU. There is a very thin deal on the table but it's what it is. Then it can try and get something on data adequacy and financial services regulation.
I wonder if Britain could have pulled the same trick of simply breaking international law by a domestic law and walking away with May's deal?
Under Boris's deal it was agreed and ratified that NI and the whole of the UK is in the UK's sovereign customs territory. We're not in EU or ECJ jurisdiction but we agreed to follow their rules, which we're now walking away from.
Under May's deal wasn't NI legally going to have been within the Customs Union? In which case walking away from that couldn't have been done in the same way surely since we'd be changing the rules for territory that legally wasn't under our jurisdiction?
Am I misreading that? Or was that a small but very significant difference between the two deals?
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
The point is that everyone would know that on January 1st, 2021, there would be no tariffs even without a trade deal. Johnson's deal just recreated the Article 50 cliff edge.
Only if we stuck to EU rules, which we're not going to do.
Johnson's deal recreated the A50 cliff edge because we wanted the cliff edge there.
But here's the thing. And I wrote this on this board at the time.
The EU didn't like Mrs May's backstop. Giving the UK unprecedented rights to access the CU/SM without payment was a situation it would be keen to avoid.
So, they were incentivized to find a deal rather than to allow the clock to run down.
In the case of Boris Johnsons Withdrawal Agreement, the shoe is on the other foot. It is the UK that is in the uncomfortable position if a deal is not reached.
As I said at the time, this worsened the UK's negotiating position.
What the UK government should say (assuming they believe it) is "we signed the Withdrawal Agreement on the basis that the EU was sincere in seeking a fair free trade agreement. Sadly, that assumption turned out to be incorrect, and we are therefore with regret walking away from it."
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
The point is that everyone would know that on January 1st, 2021, there would be no tariffs even without a trade deal. Johnson's deal just recreated the Article 50 cliff edge.
Only if we stuck to EU rules, which we're not going to do.
Johnson's deal recreated the A50 cliff edge because we wanted the cliff edge there.
But here's the thing. And I wrote this on this board at the time.
The EU didn't like Mrs May's backstop. Giving the UK unprecedented rights to access the CU/SM without payment was a situation it would be keen to avoid.
So, they were incentivized to find a deal rather than to allow the clock to run down.
In the case of Boris Johnsons Withdrawal Agreement, the shoe is on the other foot. It is the UK that is in the uncomfortable position if a deal is not reached.
As I said at the time, this worsened the UK's negotiating position.
What the UK government should say (assuming they believe it) is "we signed the Withdrawal Agreement on the basis that the EU was sincere in seeking a fair free trade agreement. Sadly, that assumption turned out to be incorrect, and we are therefore with regret walking away from it."
More go to sunny foreign holidays, mix with people from all over Europe and come back without being tested...
Unlike the idea of trying to keep British hospitality going, was totally unnecessary to allow the traditional summer holiday season.
Just madness. Utter and complete madness. We did this with the skiers in February and now we have done it again. Unbelievable.
Virtually every other country in Europe did it as well, to be fair. The tourist industry is 10% of Europe's GDP. Losing all of that, much of it permanently, would be horrendous.
I pity the governments trying to balance economic risks versus pandemic risks.
Did they all get this one wrong? Who knows.
I do know we now look set fair for a very unpleasant autumn and winter. It is going to be GRIM.
I think they have to find a way to live with Covid. From the conversaitons I have had with people from a variety of countries who I woud consider to be very focused on health and risk - and who can all work very easily and effectively from home - they all accepted the lock-downs and restrictions, and continue to do so, but they are going stir crazy. They are desperate to get out into the world again. I don't see how we carry on as we are beyond the end of next winter.
It's not even a question of carrying on as we are. European governments (and probably others worldwide) will be forced to reimpose tough lockdowns all over the shop, from autumn through winter - look at Melbourne's draconian curfew, and they have nothing like, say, the infections of Spain.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
We know more than we did in early 2020, and full national lockdown will be avoided. The aim is to keep as much going as possible, while restricting spread. I am yet to be convinced that the virus is out of control again. Undoubtedly we are testing vastly more than in feb/march. Others have suggested that the test we are using (PCR) is great for confirming cause in sick people, but less good for population based surveys, from the false positives, and also currently a lack of standardisation of how much virus is detected in the PCR assay. Are all positives a concern? Should there be a cut off, and should the number of cycles needed to obtain the result be reported? We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
The virus is out of control in Spain and France, and, arguably, in many other parts of Europe - Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, the Netherlands, and so on.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
But we are going to have a Dad's Army enforcing our new rules, unlike Johnny Foreigner :-)
Looking forward to seeing some Covid Marshals in action but my hunch is they will be hard to find. You'll need to get lucky.
Sweden. Two or three people are day roughly are dying from/with the virus.
Couple of hundred cases a day.
But everyone said Tegnell was wrong.
"Tegnell had told me the first time we spoke in the spring that it would be in the autumn when it became more apparent how successful each country had been."
As he says on lockdowns: “It’s really using a hammer to kill a fly,”
Amazing really.
I said it on here in April to universal scorn and anger and I repeat it now.
Lockdown and its aftermath is the worst policy mistake by any British government, ever.
What we are seeing now is a desperate attempt at backside covering by an administration that simply cannot, cannot admit its mistake. Supported pretty much all the ways by an opposition that would have made an even bigger mistake.
This will only change when things become much, much worse economically and socially and a majority of people are willing to accept the extra risk and the extra deaths (if they happen, the Swedish example says they won;t) to go back to a life that's worth living.
Our saviour, as I have pointed out in the past, is an unlikely one.
Step forward, Andrew Bailey. I'm sure Sunak would dearly love to prolong the illusion of furlough for much longer via extra gargantuan borrowing but Bailey has decided forthcoming generations have been mortgaged enough.
He won't bankroll Sunak's gilt sales any more. And Sunak fears adding to the country's debt.
If Theresa May's deal had passed, the UK would have a much more credible walk-away position that would have avoided most of the issues created by Johnson's Irish Sea border.
It would have been more credible to walk away from the entire backstop?
Why?
It would have been more credible to walk away from the trade negotiations because the cliff edge would have been much smaller. We would have tariff-free trade in goods across the UK.
We wouldn't have had tariff free access if we walked away from our obligations, breached the treaty and diverged.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
No we couldn't. If we walk away now, then there would be tariffs on exports from GB to the EU even if we follow all their regulations.
But we're not going to be following their regulations, don't you understand that? 🙄
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
The point is that everyone would know that on January 1st, 2021, there would be no tariffs even without a trade deal. Johnson's deal just recreated the Article 50 cliff edge.
Only if we stuck to EU rules, which we're not going to do.
Johnson's deal recreated the A50 cliff edge because we wanted the cliff edge there.
But here's the thing. And I wrote this on this board at the time.
The EU didn't like Mrs May's backstop. Giving the UK unprecedented rights to access the CU/SM without payment was a situation it would be keen to avoid.
So, they were incentivized to find a deal rather than to allow the clock to run down.
In the case of Boris Johnsons Withdrawal Agreement, the shoe is on the other foot. It is the UK that is in the uncomfortable position if a deal is not reached.
As I said at the time, this worsened the UK's negotiating position.
What the UK government should say (assuming they believe it) is "we signed the Withdrawal Agreement on the basis that the EU was sincere in seeking a fair free trade agreement. Sadly, that assumption turned out to be incorrect, and we are therefore with regret walking away from it."
That's the grown up way to deal with this.
Then, what?
Oh, that's not a great outcome either. But at least it's honest and grown up, and doesn't contravene a bunch of other treaties we've signed.
The immensely infuriating thing is that now would be the perfect time for the government to pursue a herd immunity strategy. Most of the people contracting coronavirus are young and healthy. The risk for healthy under 40s is essentially comparable to influenza - it's not an exact comparison, but there were 52 flu deaths in the under 40 bracket in 2018 (https://www.statista.com/statistics/970800/influenza-deaths-by-age-and-gender-england-wales/), and 224 deaths *with* Covid in the under 40 bracket in 2020, 85% of whom had a preexisting condition (https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/coronavirus-tragic-number-young-healthy-18471098). I recognise it isn't politically viable, but if we wanted to get back to normal as fast as possible, we should be taking advantage of the fact that the virus is spreading in the least vulnerable population bracket. Sequester the old and vulnerable for 6 weeks, let young people behave as normal and catch the virus, pay the families of anyone under 40 that dies of the virus £1 million in compensation and at the end of it half the population will have immunity for a fraction of the cost of continued lockdown and track and trace.
Some people would be paying their kids to go out and party!
Comments
Social distancing will *reduce* immediate spread of the pox. But it doesn't mean no circulation. Yet a load of people circulating past each other in a pub is fine and 7 kids playing football is dangerous.
But we are where we are etc.
https://twitter.com/ProfMarkElliott/status/1304408389393551360
There is a case to be made for limiting the number of interactions rather than the type. eg you can meet up to four households each week and can choose whether it is four households in one go or the same other household four times, one household then three households etc. You can also choose whether to meet in restaurants or the home.
But this would too much social control so we have a more arbitrary system.
We are back to where we were in March. The increases are built in and going to be almost impossible to stop. Our testing regime still can't cope. The "insta test" is still an aspiration but not a reality. We cannot afford full lockdown again and we have seen the horrendous implications for education. We need to lead more normal lives even if it means that several tens of thousands more will die. Which they will.
There were no good options here but there were certainly less bad ones.
The evidence shows that yes it is circulating within your immediate surroundings, so having a separate family on a table elsewhere in the room that is distanced from you is pretty safe - having family in your living room close to you is not.
Do I wish it was the other way around? Yes, of course. But that isn't what the science is saying at the minute.
Yesterday someone posted some research on masks, suggesting that they resulted in lower viral loads, and therefore less severe infections. It will be interesting to see if this is true.
The 2nd wave is going to be grisly, it will require severe and repeated restrictions, and I don't think people WILL stand for these limitations, nor for the horrible economic damage that comes along with them.
Something has to give. What and where?
Wouldn't it be better to properly shield Nan?
Brighton was, It wasn’t the fact that they went abroad it was how they behaved when they got here, stupidly allowed by the authorities, packing into discos without mask and distancing being enforced. If they had come to sit by the pool, have a meal out and a few sensible distanced beers it would have been better for all.
When a flight comes back from Athens and two weeks later we find one of them has covid, nearly impossible to trace. Did they get it in Greece, airport, the plane, back home? Who did they come into contact with in Greece, when, where, etc etc etc.
Even if it was 7 family members sat at home at a big dining room table how is the potential pox or just 7 more of a risk than 6 of them going to a restaurant and getting the potential pox of scores?
Crazy.
Next week we will be averaging over 3k new cases a day. The week after? I am not optimistic.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/203873/largest-covid19-testing-study-shows-cases/
... Young people aged 18-24 were also significantly more likely to be infected than all other age groups (0.25% prevalence, up from 0.08% between 24th July and 11th August), while the lowest rates were found in those aged 65 and above (0.04%). ..
But I also can't stand Nancy Pelosi. The hectoring glee with which she loves to lecture the UK whenever she has an opportunity.
A real un-diplomatic Britain hater.
We have many mitigations in place - be they facemasks, social distancing, contact tracing, safe(r) workplaces that were not in place in March. I know people are fed-up of this, and want it over, but a little more patience is needed. Vaccines will come (even if not fully effective). Probably not before Christmas 2020, but hopefully by the early new year/spring of 2021.
There were only two houses signalling on BLM in my villages. They had their signs up for ages, but they all came down by the August BH weekend.
The NHS worshipping rainbows are still all over the place of course.
Sadly, I see no reason why Britain will not follow these nearby examples, just as we followed Spain, Italy and France in the first wave. We are about two-three weeks behind.
I hope I am wrong.
You can ask the question as many ways as you want but that is what the data is showing. The NHS is identifying and tracing 60% of all infections and the overwhelming evidence - as reported by the Scottish government as well as the UK one - is that the spread is occurring in homes and non-socially distanced events and not at socially distanced restaurants.
You may not like that, but the data is the data.
If they continue to release accurate updates in each area it will allow people to make an informed decision about whether to isolate or not.
Sweden is the answer - not massive draconian lockdown until next March.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/09/10/ignoring-lesson-sweden-makes-tougher-covid-crackdown-inevitable/
Why?
It's potentially going to be the most depressing winter since, ooh, 1917?
So a few questions arise from this in addition to the one you raise. Are private tests included in the official figures? The answer must be yes because official figure showed a spike in Northampton. How reliable are these private tests? When the company re-tested did those that tested positive a second time go on official figures again (i.e. were double-counted)?
I don`t lnow the answers to these questions.
If you mean we could walk away by refusing to diverge and sticking to their rules - yeah we could do that but that's not the point. We could do that today if we wanted to do so.
One excellent step the government could take is show the infection distribution by region and AGE GROUP.
What is happening is that we are massively overplaying the risks to the young and fit, and underplaying the risks to the old and unfit. Yes, it remains odd that Heneghan, who has got every call right, and who actually forced government to change its absurd way of measuring covid deaths, isn't lead advisor by now.
In fact, thinking about it, maybe that's why he isn't – he exposed PHE as innumerate.
Couple of hundred cases a day.
But everyone said Tegnell was wrong.
"Tegnell had told me the first time we spoke in the spring that it would be in the autumn when it became more apparent how successful each country had been."
https://www.ft.com/content/5cc92d45-fbdb-43b7-9c66-26501693a371
As he says on lockdowns: “It’s really using a hammer to kill a fly,”
Go crack open a Barolo and start wanking on about Europe, please.
One other thing I noted was how pleased they were to see Brits. I heard that on multiple occasions. They want us to return, in numbers.
Needless to say, governments have done none of this planning, which they have shared with the public. Johnson's government, although particularly inattentive, is by no means alone.
Under Theresa May's proposal how would we diverge our regulations and keep tariff free access?
I can't believe Americans love their leaders bashing Britain too much...
They're a small minority but they vote and they lap it up. The rest of the nation won't care.
America has always had a vocal Irish lobby who love crap like this.
Johnson's deal recreated the A50 cliff edge because we wanted the cliff edge there.
"Oh, it's lovely to hear British accents again"
"Ah, so nice to see British money!"
"We really miss the English!"
Heard versions of this everywhere.
http://viz.co.uk/2014/09/26/insect-hammer/
America can and should wait.
Under Boris's deal it was agreed and ratified that NI and the whole of the UK is in the UK's sovereign customs territory. We're not in EU or ECJ jurisdiction but we agreed to follow their rules, which we're now walking away from.
Under May's deal wasn't NI legally going to have been within the Customs Union? In which case walking away from that couldn't have been done in the same way surely since we'd be changing the rules for territory that legally wasn't under our jurisdiction?
Am I misreading that? Or was that a small but very significant difference between the two deals?
The EU didn't like Mrs May's backstop. Giving the UK unprecedented rights to access the CU/SM without payment was a situation it would be keen to avoid.
So, they were incentivized to find a deal rather than to allow the clock to run down.
In the case of Boris Johnsons Withdrawal Agreement, the shoe is on the other foot. It is the UK that is in the uncomfortable position if a deal is not reached.
As I said at the time, this worsened the UK's negotiating position.
What the UK government should say (assuming they believe it) is "we signed the Withdrawal Agreement on the basis that the EU was sincere in seeking a fair free trade agreement. Sadly, that assumption turned out to be incorrect, and we are therefore with regret walking away from it."
That's the grown up way to deal with this.
I said it on here in April to universal scorn and anger and I repeat it now.
Lockdown and its aftermath is the worst policy mistake by any British government, ever.
What we are seeing now is a desperate attempt at backside covering by an administration that simply cannot, cannot admit its mistake. Supported pretty much all the ways by an opposition that would have made an even bigger mistake.
This will only change when things become much, much worse economically and socially and a majority of people are willing to accept the extra risk and the extra deaths (if they happen, the Swedish example says they won;t) to go back to a life that's worth living.
Our saviour, as I have pointed out in the past, is an unlikely one.
Step forward, Andrew Bailey. I'm sure Sunak would dearly love to prolong the illusion of furlough for much longer via extra gargantuan borrowing but Bailey has decided forthcoming generations have been mortgaged enough.
He won't bankroll Sunak's gilt sales any more. And Sunak fears adding to the country's debt.
What a hero.