So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Whilst I accept there has been an increase in both I would expect some context around seasonal viruses. It cannot be just anecdotal that every year when schools and universities go back people get a lot of colds, I would therefore generally expect numbers of people in hospital and all deaths to start to increase at this point.
I can give an example in hospitality we review sales etc generally by quarter because where a bank holiday is or good weather sits can significantly alter income and on either a quarterly or annual basis we can see what is happening more clearly.
Job support scheme - employees working one third their normal hours get govt top up to 2/3rds salary - 1/3 from employer, 1/3 from govt.
Is the top up to 2/3rds, or is the top up 2/3rds?
My reading was top up to 2/3rds
OK, curious because the Sky tweet suggests the latter.
I understood employer pays 33%, govt pays two thirds of what employees lose so 0.667 x 0.667 = 0.455 plus the employer paid 33% = 78.455%
So essentially compared to furlough employees lose about 1.5% and employer s pay a third not a fifth.
I think (!)
And it puts the onus on the employee to return to work and for employers to find work for them to do. It's a good compromise because paying people 80% of their wages to sit on their arses isn't sustainable.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
Bit like the perennial debate on the utility of wasps. Many years ago I watched a wasp carefully strip down a piece of meat, to take pieces away. Probably wasn't always the same wasp, of course.
Wasps fulfil a valuable niche - just as other species that are a nuisance to us do. Remove them and knock-on effects would be revealed.
Figs need them, for a start
Very useful for sticking down a school-chum`s blazer as well.
Here's a statistic to throw into the debate on living with things, how many deaths are acceptable, and precautions taken:
Deaths per year from hijacking are an average of 0.2 over the past 5 years. Even taken over the entire time from 1942 onwards, it's 50 per year, with a grand total (over 77 years) of 3880 (of which 1149 were on board aircraft).
Seeing that the amount of time consumed in Security is so high and the amount of effort and money put into Airport Security is so great, why don't we just do away with it? We'd save so much time and hassle, and the number of deaths currently being lost to hijacking is miniscule.
(For the avoidance of doubt, and for anyone who lost loved ones on September 11th - this is NOT a serious suggestion, nor is it intended to downgrade their deaths. It is, though, exactly down the lines of the "we can abandon precautions because deaths are now so low) of the denialists - except that the scale of deaths from covid utterly eclipses the scale of deaths from hijacking, but is seen as just something to accept)
Your analogy is not a fair one. The "time and hassle" saved , ie. utility gained, by abandoning airport security would be slight compared to that of restoring liberty to us all. The willingness to jettison liberty is a surprising and very frightening aspect of this crisis.
I don`t know what the answer is, but I do know that the rationale for lockdown, and all of the economic and liberty distruction that this entails, was originally to protect the health service and give us some breathing space but has long morphed into something different, authoritarian, snitch-ridden and scary.
You mention "denialists". Sure they exist, but in small ultra libertarian enclaves I`d suggest. The rest of us understand the health consequences at stake but worry greatly about the myriad other aspects of this situation.
There are plenty of them. Take a look at “lockdownsceptics,org”
I’m not sure the Rishi scheme will be much comfort to @Cyclefree daughter or many other small businesses. It clearly works where a lack of demand can be mitigated by cutting hours but not where that isn’t feasible.
Cats could be amazing if they wanted to be. They just choose not to.
Edit: ah, I see others got there before me, and more succinctly.
Cats know they are amazing and don’t feel the need to prove it, especially not to humans.
The only clever thing cats do is manage to persuade multiple humans that they are their sole owner so they get fed multiple times They do however have four drumsticks and are reputed to be quite tasty
Cats don’t have owners. They have staff.
That is probably why pinko lefties prefer cats while upstanding and independent conservatives prefer dogs. Liberals want to be ordered around, while conservatives prefer to be self-reliant and independent.
Conservative prefer unquestioning obedience from their unpaid labourers.
Lol. Most sensible dogs make sure they get paid, and have a remarkably strong sense of fairness. There have even been experiments with two dogs rewarded differentially for the same effort, and the under-rewarded dog tends quickly to go on strike.
Cats could be amazing if they wanted to be. They just choose not to.
Edit: ah, I see others got there before me, and more succinctly.
Cats know they are amazing and don’t feel the need to prove it, especially not to humans.
The only clever thing cats do is manage to persuade multiple humans that they are their sole owner so they get fed multiple times They do however have four drumsticks and are reputed to be quite tasty
Cats don’t have owners. They have staff.
That is probably why pinko lefties prefer cats while upstanding and independent conservatives prefer dogs. Liberals want to be ordered around, while conservatives prefer to be self-reliant and independent.
As a dog loving liberal who can't abide useless mangy cats, i do not approve this message
Dogs may be man's best friend, but no cat ever told the cops where you hide your drugs.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Whilst I accept there has been an increase in both I would expect some context around seasonal viruses. It cannot be just anecdotal that every year when schools and universities go back people get a lot of colds, I would therefore generally expect numbers of people in hospital and all deaths to start to increase at this point.
I can give an example in hospitality we review sales etc generally by quarter because where a bank holiday is or good weather sits can significantly alter income and on either a quarterly or annual basis we can see what is happening more clearly.
The numbers are quite specifically for COVID admissions to hospital, and deaths from COVID.
Yes, seasonal colds/flu are up. But cases, hospitalisations and deaths from COVID are quite clearly rising. And they seem to be accelerating.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Here's a statistic to throw into the debate on living with things, how many deaths are acceptable, and precautions taken:
Deaths per year from hijacking are an average of 0.2 over the past 5 years. Even taken over the entire time from 1942 onwards, it's 50 per year, with a grand total (over 77 years) of 3880 (of which 1149 were on board aircraft).
Seeing that the amount of time consumed in Security is so high and the amount of effort and money put into Airport Security is so great, why don't we just do away with it? We'd save so much time and hassle, and the number of deaths currently being lost to hijacking is miniscule.
(For the avoidance of doubt, and for anyone who lost loved ones on September 11th - this is NOT a serious suggestion, nor is it intended to downgrade their deaths. It is, though, exactly down the lines of the "we can abandon precautions because deaths are now so low) of the denialists - except that the scale of deaths from covid utterly eclipses the scale of deaths from hijacking, but is seen as just something to accept)
People have the option of not flying. They do not have the option of avoiding the virus. If hijackings were commonplace, people would refuse to fly.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
Broadening the question slightly, what is the point of humans?
In other words, does anything need to have a point?
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
I’m not sure the Rishi scheme will be much comfort to @Cyclefree daughter or many other small businesses. It clearly works where a lack of demand can be mitigated by cutting hours but not where that isn’t feasible.
For places like hospitality that's going to be especially important. It means that staff who would have previously worked past 10pm can have their wages supported with that.
The VAT cut for hospitality and the extending loans so they only need to be repaid as you grow and other measures should all be little bits to help too.
OT Fish and chip shop update. Closed awaiting repairs. The KFC takeaway a bit further along the road has masked staff and is positively festooned with QR codes.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
There's a whole tourist industry based around tiger watching - and it's a highly lucrative industry in otherwise poor areas of India. So that's not really true
I’m not sure the Rishi scheme will be much comfort to @Cyclefree daughter or many other small businesses. It clearly works where a lack of demand can be mitigated by cutting hours but not where that isn’t feasible.
Yes. Isn't part of the problem that some of the mitigation requires more staff with less capacity.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
The "purpose" of a sparrow is to make more sparrow DNA, surely?
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
On government communication. Private Eye might have supplied a reason why departments were not warned in advance. The government needed to have devised the new restrictions only after the wetting of baby Wilf's head at the weekend.
Do you use it to "filter out" people who have not had the good fortune of seeing that classic data representation? Or do you test how they respond when told information about it.
For a job interview knowledge is meh, unless it is directly being used as part of the job. Being able to interpret the available data is a much better criterion.
OK, I'll modify my anti-cat stance slightly. They are good if you want to murder a bunch of mice or rats.
But when you want a pet to do something non-psychotic, get a dog.
We got a cat in March, he has brought so much happiness to the whole house, with remarkably little effort on his part.
A dog could have done that, tested you for COVID and some cancers, got you out walking, kept your property safe from burglars, helped catch local criminals, guided you if you're blind, herded your sheep and fetched your grouse or partridges.
Cats are better than dogs.
I have issues with both. Last year my cat died and I didn't replace it. I noticed two things: First, the cat ate more animal protein than I did. Second, the cat (through cat litter) generated more landfill waste than I did. I have come to the conclusion that, if we are to truly "save the planet", carnivorous pets are a first world self indulgence.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Whilst I accept there has been an increase in both I would expect some context around seasonal viruses. It cannot be just anecdotal that every year when schools and universities go back people get a lot of colds, I would therefore generally expect numbers of people in hospital and all deaths to start to increase at this point.
I can give an example in hospitality we review sales etc generally by quarter because where a bank holiday is or good weather sits can significantly alter income and on either a quarterly or annual basis we can see what is happening more clearly.
The numbers are quite specifically for COVID admissions to hospital, and deaths from COVID.
Yes, seasonal colds/flu are up. But cases, hospitalisations and deaths from COVID are quite clearly rising. And they seem to be accelerating.
Yes but you have to admit that deaths in the first lockdown significantly affected the old and infirm in hospitals and care homes, who have now sadly died but cannot do so again. Not only are there now better procedures for infection control in hospitals and care homes, but we also have better treatments for people who are ill. Surely we cannot expect the same steep incline of hospitalisations and deaths like last time.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
OK, I'll modify my anti-cat stance slightly. They are good if you want to murder a bunch of mice or rats.
But when you want a pet to do something non-psychotic, get a dog.
We got a cat in March, he has brought so much happiness to the whole house, with remarkably little effort on his part.
A dog could have done that, tested you for COVID and some cancers, got you out walking, kept your property safe from burglars, helped catch local criminals, guided you if you're blind, herded your sheep and fetched your grouse or partridges.
And less likely to give you a brain-modifying parasite.
I’m not sure the Rishi scheme will be much comfort to @Cyclefree daughter or many other small businesses. It clearly works where a lack of demand can be mitigated by cutting hours but not where that isn’t feasible.
For places like hospitality that's going to be especially important. It means that staff who would have previously worked past 10pm can have their wages supported with that.
The VAT cut for hospitality and the extending loans so they only need to be repaid as you grow and other measures should all be little bits to help too.
That’s a good point about the impact of early closing, assuming that hours worked prior to the 10pm shutdown are taken as the baseline. I was more thinking about businesses that have a fixed level of staffing (probably due to being small) but need to remain open for normal hours to serve the reduced level of demand.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
The local dogs have been making a right mess of the pavements in the last couple of months. One imagines that new, bored with lockdown owners cannot be bothered cleaning up or even with guiding their animals away from the middle of the pavement.
Here's a statistic to throw into the debate on living with things, how many deaths are acceptable, and precautions taken:
Deaths per year from hijacking are an average of 0.2 over the past 5 years. Even taken over the entire time from 1942 onwards, it's 50 per year, with a grand total (over 77 years) of 3880 (of which 1149 were on board aircraft).
Seeing that the amount of time consumed in Security is so high and the amount of effort and money put into Airport Security is so great, why don't we just do away with it? We'd save so much time and hassle, and the number of deaths currently being lost to hijacking is miniscule.
(For the avoidance of doubt, and for anyone who lost loved ones on September 11th - this is NOT a serious suggestion, nor is it intended to downgrade their deaths. It is, though, exactly down the lines of the "we can abandon precautions because deaths are now so low) of the denialists - except that the scale of deaths from covid utterly eclipses the scale of deaths from hijacking, but is seen as just something to accept)
People have the option of not flying. They do not have the option of avoiding the virus. If hijackings were commonplace, people would refuse to fly.
Also people die from Flu every year - we do not try to stop that at source. In a bad winter there could be thousands of such deaths.
I offer a counter to your hijacking deaths. Deaths related to cars have steadily decreased whilst use has gone up. This has been done by measures such as seat belts and better quality roads and cars. We could totally irradicate deaths by cars by completely banning them however they would then lose their benefit and utility in society. There is always a balance in these things even if we are not aware on a day to day basis
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Thanks. Covid hospitalisations at the peak in March were over 3000 per day if I recall?
Ask and Ye shall receive -
Although its growing, it is growing incredibly slowly compared to the virtually vertical way it rose at the start of the pandemic in March.
Apples and oranges. In March they were basically only testing symptomatic people, so it was very likely they had it. If you had the same testing numbers back then you'd probably see the same rise, but earlier on.
Here's a statistic to throw into the debate on living with things, how many deaths are acceptable, and precautions taken:
Deaths per year from hijacking are an average of 0.2 over the past 5 years. Even taken over the entire time from 1942 onwards, it's 50 per year, with a grand total (over 77 years) of 3880 (of which 1149 were on board aircraft).
Seeing that the amount of time consumed in Security is so high and the amount of effort and money put into Airport Security is so great, why don't we just do away with it? We'd save so much time and hassle, and the number of deaths currently being lost to hijacking is miniscule.
(For the avoidance of doubt, and for anyone who lost loved ones on September 11th - this is NOT a serious suggestion, nor is it intended to downgrade their deaths. It is, though, exactly down the lines of the "we can abandon precautions because deaths are now so low) of the denialists - except that the scale of deaths from covid utterly eclipses the scale of deaths from hijacking, but is seen as just something to accept)
People have the option of not flying. They do not have the option of avoiding the virus. If hijackings were commonplace, people would refuse to fly.
Hijackings are not commonplace. So obviously the precautions used are unnecessary. (This is the logic of those quoting low coronavirus numbers and using them to argue that the precautions used are unnecessary. Or that the economic cost is too high against those current deaths: hijacking deaths are averaging one every five years; the cost and hassle of airport security is all up against that one death every five years... on that logic)
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Whilst I accept there has been an increase in both I would expect some context around seasonal viruses. It cannot be just anecdotal that every year when schools and universities go back people get a lot of colds, I would therefore generally expect numbers of people in hospital and all deaths to start to increase at this point.
I can give an example in hospitality we review sales etc generally by quarter because where a bank holiday is or good weather sits can significantly alter income and on either a quarterly or annual basis we can see what is happening more clearly.
The numbers are quite specifically for COVID admissions to hospital, and deaths from COVID.
Yes, seasonal colds/flu are up. But cases, hospitalisations and deaths from COVID are quite clearly rising. And they seem to be accelerating.
Yes but you have to admit that deaths in the first lockdown significantly affected the old and infirm in hospitals and care homes, who have now sadly died but cannot do so again. Not only are there now better procedures for infection control in hospitals and care homes, but we also have better treatments for people who are ill. Surely we cannot expect the same steep incline of hospitalisations and deaths like last time.
We have plenty of elderly, inform and ill people left to die from this. Some of them are my relatives, by the way.
The reason that the hospitalisations and deaths have stayed relatively low so far is that the composition of the group that is getting ill is more balanced - earlier in the year it was massively biased towards the elderly.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
Sunak's scheme isn't particularly generous: maximum 22% govt subsidy for employees, 20% for the self-employed. That's very different from the furlough scheme.
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
I’m not sure the Rishi scheme will be much comfort to @Cyclefree daughter or many other small businesses. It clearly works where a lack of demand can be mitigated by cutting hours but not where that isn’t feasible.
For places like hospitality that's going to be especially important. It means that staff who would have previously worked past 10pm can have their wages supported with that.
The VAT cut for hospitality and the extending loans so they only need to be repaid as you grow and other measures should all be little bits to help too.
That’s a good point about the impact of early closing, assuming that hours worked prior to the 10pm shutdown are taken as the baseline. I was more thinking about businesses that have a fixed level of staffing (probably due to being small) but need to remain open for normal hours to serve the reduced level of demand.
Well indeed all the factors need to be taken in combination.
The VAT cut should help hospitality make bigger margins from smaller trade. If you buy a meal for £10 and £2 soft drink then previously the business would get £10 and £2 would be VAT to the Treasury. For the same price now the business gets £11.43 and 57 pence goes to the Treasury. Large brands have tended to pass on the VAT cut to the customers but many small businesses, entirely reasonably in my vew, have not.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
Bit like the perennial debate on the utility of wasps. Many years ago I watched a wasp carefully strip down a piece of meat, to take pieces away. Probably wasn't always the same wasp, of course.
Wasps fulfil a valuable niche - just as other species that are a nuisance to us do. Remove them and knock-on effects would be revealed.
Darwin deplored ichneumonid wasps and even speculated that they proved the non-existence of a compassionate God.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Sunak's scheme isn't particularly generous: maximum 22% govt subsidy for employees, 20% for the self-employed. That's very different from the furlough scheme.
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
Sunak is doing what Andrew Bailey is prepared to bankroll right now.
He dare not risk failed gilt auctions.
If sterling collapses, the entire game is up anyway.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
There's a whole tourist industry based around tiger watching - and it's a highly lucrative industry in otherwise poor areas of India. So that's not really true
The point is that their value is (or, rather, should be) bound up in intrinsic value rather than value to humans (regardless of the quantity of value to humans).
Do you use it to "filter out" people who have not had the good fortune of seeing that classic data representation? Or do you test how they respond when told information about it.
For a job interview knowledge is meh, unless it is directly being used as part of the job. Being able to interpret the available data is a much better criterion.
The Minard diagram in question is famous to the point of being ubiquitous in basic courses on presentation of stats. I am (professionally speaking) an amateur - encountered it a zillion times.
- first question - what is this? - second if they don't know - explain what it is, what does it tell you? - second otherwise - what does it tell you? - third question - what potential weaknesses are there in this approach? what can you see from the graph itself?
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Thanks. Covid hospitalisations at the peak in March were over 3000 per day if I recall?
Ask and Ye shall receive -
Although its growing, it is growing incredibly slowly compared to the virtually vertical way it rose at the start of the pandemic in March.
Apples and oranges. In March they were basically only testing symptomatic people, so it was very likely they had it. If you had the same testing numbers back then you'd probably see the same rise, but earlier on.
To be fair though that's data for admissions not data for general testing or community cases.
I think the rise would have been steeper either way early on, which makes sense given R is estimated to be a bit above 1 currently whereas it was about 3 at the start.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Sunak's scheme isn't particularly generous: maximum 22% govt subsidy for employees, 20% for the self-employed. That's very different from the furlough scheme.
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
I think that is fair but not sure he had the luxury of hindsight
Sunak's scheme isn't particularly generous: maximum 22% govt subsidy for employees, 20% for the self-employed. That's very different from the furlough scheme.
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
Sunak is doing what Andrew Bailey is prepared to bankroll right now.
He dare not risk failed gilt auctions.
If sterling collapses, the entire game is up anyway.
No it is the other way around. The Chancellor makes the policy and the Bank will do what it needs to do.
The Bank of England and Andrew Bailey may be theoretically independent but in reality during an crisis like this the Chancellor is the boss, not Andrew Bailey.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
Bit like the perennial debate on the utility of wasps. Many years ago I watched a wasp carefully strip down a piece of meat, to take pieces away. Probably wasn't always the same wasp, of course.
Wasps fulfil a valuable niche - just as other species that are a nuisance to us do. Remove them and knock-on effects would be revealed.
Darwin deplored ichneumonid wasps and even speculated that they proved the non-existence of a compassionate God.
Indeed he did. He was deploying the "argument from evil" to disprove the existence of an omni-god (all good, all knowing and all powerful).
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
I am struggling to see this new scheme getting much use. As I understand it, if a firm keeps three workers and has them each work 1/3 of the time, it has to pay 56% of the normal wage of each worker, so 167% of one worker's normal wage overall. By contrast if they fire two of the workers and has one worker work full time, they pay 100% of one worker's wage. Who is going to go for the first option, especially in a sector like hospitality where hiring and firing costs are low?
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
I've just seen the following on fivethirtyeight. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/ They are of course results from their simulations, so your opinion on these figures will be coupled with your belief in the competence of Nate Silver's models.
Weird and not-so-weird possibilities
The chances that these situations will crop up Trump wins the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 11 in 100 Biden wins the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 89 in 100 Trump wins more than 50% of the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 8 in 100 Biden wins more than 50% of the popular vote Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 84 in 100 Trump wins in a landslide Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin <1 in 100 Biden wins in a landslide Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin 30 in 100 Trump wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College <1 in 100 Biden wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College 11 in 100 No one wins the Electoral College No candidate gets 270 electoral votes and Congress decides the election <1 in 100 Trump wins at least one state that Clinton won in 2016 36 in 100 Biden wins at least one state that Trump won in 2016 92 in 100 The map stays exactly the same as it was in 2016 Each candidate wins exactly the same states that his party won in 2016 <1 in 100 The election hinges on a recount Candidates are within half a percentage point in one or more decisive states 5 in 100
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
I do wish the UK government had gone a bit harder e.g. Scottish approach of no mixing between households indoors.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
That's good news to me.
Considering it will take 2-3 weeks for it to be clear what impact this weeks new measures will have, if its already slowly levelling off that is because of actions people had voluntarily taken before these measures kicked in.
We don't need an R of 0, we just need to get R back to or below 1 again. If these limited measures are sufficient to do that then there's no need for anything more draconian.
I am struggling to see this new scheme getting much use. As I understand it, if a firm keeps three workers and has them each work 1/3 of the time, it has to pay 56% of the normal wage of each worker, so 167% of one worker's normal wage overall. By contrast if they fire two of the workers and has one worker work full time, they pay 100% of one worker's wage. Who is going to go for the first option, especially in a sector like hospitality where hiring and firing costs are low?
Businesses who value their staff and want to keep them on.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
I generate similar each day - sometime after the 4pm update.
Thanks. Covid hospitalisations at the peak in March were over 3000 per day if I recall?
Ask and Ye shall receive -
Excellent - thanks. Is the rise sufficient to justify the new authoritarian measures, I wonder?
It's the fact that it is rising that is the decider:
Rising = more restrictions required Steady = current restrictions sufficient Falling = restrictions can be eased
So, if anything, the current restrictions are actually insufficient.
It reminds me of the confusion you get in physics about Newton's Laws of Motion. Everyone's intuition is that you need to keep pushing things to keep them moving, and that when you remove the push, they stop. Whereas, if you do the analysis properly, they keep moving forever in the complete absence of forces, and the effect of forces is to change motion.
The wrong intuition is incredibly firmly embedded- because we are used to moving on sticky frictionny surfaces. So physics teachers have to go to huge (and often unsuccessful) efforts to get students to think in Newtonian ways.
It's the same here. All our instincts are to say "lots of infections --> need more restrictions" and "few infections --> need less restrictions". But the way to control the graph is, as you say, to increase restrictions when caases are low and rising. Partly because that's how the system works, but also to avoid the scenario where the case numbers are high and rising.
I am struggling to see this new scheme getting much use. As I understand it, if a firm keeps three workers and has them each work 1/3 of the time, it has to pay 56% of the normal wage of each worker, so 167% of one worker's normal wage overall. By contrast if they fire two of the workers and has one worker work full time, they pay 100% of one worker's wage. Who is going to go for the first option, especially in a sector like hospitality where hiring and firing costs are low?
Businesses who value their staff and want to keep them on.
You can value your staff all you like but margins in hospitality are typically tiny and these are businesses not charities. This scheme is laughably ungenerous.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
That's good news to me.
Considering it will take 2-3 weeks for it to be clear what impact this weeks new measures will have, if its already slowly levelling off that is because of actions people had voluntarily taken before these measures kicked in.
We don't need an R of 0, we just need to get R back to or below 1 again. If these limited measures are sufficient to do that then there's no need for anything more draconian.
Numbers of infections will increase dramatically over the next two weeks as the university effect kicks in, if there is cross community infections hospital admissions will go up. Unless the icu wards get overwhelmed then deaths will stay low in comparison to March April.
It is clearly some operational issue going on behind the scenes. They aren't doing orders of magnitudes of actual tests, so why has it slowed to a crawl to turn around the ones they are doing. I believe in the US, the turn around time has gone out to a week and it is being put down to a shortage of reagents.
If it is something like a shortage of reagents, it would also make sense why they have been restricting availability of test slots.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
I do wish the UK government had gone a bit harder e.g. Scottish approach of no mixing between households indoors.
Fortunately up here we are acting as a control group on that.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
That's good news to me.
Considering it will take 2-3 weeks for it to be clear what impact this weeks new measures will have, if its already slowly levelling off that is because of actions people had voluntarily taken before these measures kicked in.
We don't need an R of 0, we just need to get R back to or below 1 again. If these limited measures are sufficient to do that then there's no need for anything more draconian.
Numbers of infections will increase dramatically over the next two weeks as the university effect kicks in, if there is cross community infections hospital admissions will go up. Unless the icu wards get overwhelmed then deaths will stay low in comparison to March April.
Perhaps rather than nominally locking all the students away restricted to each flat in the uni halls, they should just have a massive couple of weeks of events. Then lock them away and get it all over and done with.
Sunak's scheme isn't particularly generous: maximum 22% govt subsidy for employees, 20% for the self-employed. That's very different from the furlough scheme.
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
Attempting to deal with the pandemic and move to new, as yet unspecified, trading arrangements with much of the rest of the world at the same time may prove to be the single worst, self inflicted decision any government has taken in modern times. I sincerely hope it doesn’t, but it’s a hell of a gamble.
I am struggling to see this new scheme getting much use. As I understand it, if a firm keeps three workers and has them each work 1/3 of the time, it has to pay 56% of the normal wage of each worker, so 167% of one worker's normal wage overall. By contrast if they fire two of the workers and has one worker work full time, they pay 100% of one worker's wage. Who is going to go for the first option, especially in a sector like hospitality where hiring and firing costs are low?
Businesses who value their staff and want to keep them on.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
Do you really mean "At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating"? Accelleration is the second derivative and the rate of accelleration is the third derivative. If the third derivative has stopped accellerating then the fifth derivative is 0. (!)
At least if the 5th derivative is zero then the growth cannot be exponentiial :-)
I presume you mean the number of hospitsations have stopped accelerating, meaning the second derivative is zero. All this reminds me of the famous quote by Nixon on inflation.
It is clearly some operational issue going on behind the scenes. They aren't doing orders of magnitudes of actual tests, so why has it slowed to a crawl to turn around the ones they are doing. I believe in the US, the turn around time has gone out to a week and it is being put down to a shortage of reagents.
If it is something like a shortage of reagents, it would also make sense why they have been restricting availability of test slots.
One of the stories my father's former colleagues have heard is that one of the companies carrying out the tests has screwed up by not doing the swabbing probably, so what's been sent to be tested isn't very useful.
Something to do with people having a strong gag reflex and the person in the field not going all the way. (Stop sniggering, this is a serious matter.)
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
I do wish the UK government had gone a bit harder e.g. Scottish approach of no mixing between households indoors.
Fortunately up here we are acting as a control group on that.
The thing is we have so many regions of local lockdown now across the UK, we might as well just simplify it to all.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
There's a whole tourist industry based around tiger watching - and it's a highly lucrative industry in otherwise poor areas of India. So that's not really true
The point is that their value is (or, rather, should be) bound up in intrinsic value rather than value to humans (regardless of the quantity of value to humans).
This debate reminds me of a famous theological question/answer
Why does it rain?
No scientist can really answer that. They can explain HOW it rains, the mechanism of evaporation, precipitation, and so on, but not the WHY
A believer, on the other hand, can say: it rains to feed the wheat that grows to feed mankind, so that he may sing the praise of God.
Religion often gives you an answer to WHY, which is hugely important to human happiness.
Do you use it to "filter out" people who have not had the good fortune of seeing that classic data representation? Or do you test how they respond when told information about it.
For a job interview knowledge is meh, unless it is directly being used as part of the job. Being able to interpret the available data is a much better criterion.
Seems a bit much if you are going to be flipping burgers...
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
I do wish the UK government had gone a bit harder e.g. Scottish approach of no mixing between households indoors.
Fortunately up here we are acting as a control group on that.
The thing is we have so many regions of local lockdown now across the UK, we might as well just simplify it to all.
I agree. It doesn't help that the PM made a national broadcast which led and dominated all the news for 24 hours in which the less stringent rules were widely publicised. Virtually nothing was made of the fact that c a quarter of the English population has much tighter regs. And that for us absolutely nothing changed on Tuesday.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
That's good news to me.
Considering it will take 2-3 weeks for it to be clear what impact this weeks new measures will have, if its already slowly levelling off that is because of actions people had voluntarily taken before these measures kicked in.
We don't need an R of 0, we just need to get R back to or below 1 again. If these limited measures are sufficient to do that then there's no need for anything more draconian.
Numbers of infections will increase dramatically over the next two weeks as the university effect kicks in, if there is cross community infections hospital admissions will go up. Unless the icu wards get overwhelmed then deaths will stay low in comparison to March April.
I've had multiple reports of Covid cases in schools, from different parts of the country.
I am much afeared that we are headed for a Total Lockdown (schools included) which will be significantly worse than the first, because it coincides with normal flu season (plus less chance to go outdoors).
Remember the Covid Rule: imagine the reasonable worst case scenario, because that is what will happen
10.5 BF for Trump to win Virginia looks a bit generous to me.
Democrat Joe Biden leads Republican Donald Trump by 5 points, 48%-43%, among likely Virginia voters. Among the most enthusiastic likely voters, Biden’s lead grows to 8 points, 51%-43%.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
There's a whole tourist industry based around tiger watching - and it's a highly lucrative industry in otherwise poor areas of India. So that's not really true
The point is that their value is (or, rather, should be) bound up in intrinsic value rather than value to humans (regardless of the quantity of value to humans).
This debate reminds me of a famous theological question/answer
Why does it rain?
No scientist can really answer that. They can explain HOW it rains, the mechanism of evaporation, precipitation, and so on, but not the WHY
A believer, on the other hand, can say: it rains to feed the wheat that grows to feed mankind, so that he may sing the praise of God.
Religion often gives you an answer to WHY, which is hugely important to human happiness.
If the alternative is 'sing the praise of God' I think I'll stick to sheer, utter, absurd purposelessness.
So - if this morning’s newspaper reports are true - there will be no help for the one sector which has been specifically targeted by the latest restrictions: the hospitality sector, despite it being apparently a source of only 5% of the increase in infections.
If true, a disgrace.
This sector has lost most of its spring/summer season, will lose the Xmas/NY season, possibly the start of the next spring season and, even while open, is losing a very significant percentage of its normal trading. Early closing will do little to help stop the virus’s spread but will do a great deal of damage to this sector.
I really hope the newspaper reports are wrong.
In other news Trump makes it clear he’s going to steal the election.
Please tell me there’s some good news somewhere.
2.5 hours to go until we find out.
I don't trust media reports. Remember Peston saying he'd been authoritatively told that the Chancellor had no major news to announce . . . about 30 minutes before the Chancellor announced the furlough scheme?
The media have to sell column inches and develop clickbait. Lets find out what the Chancellor actually announces, I'd be shocked if there's no help for hospitality considering his summer job support scheme was almost exclusively targetted at hospitality.
I work in Hospitality so I am hopeful that something can be done. The current restrictions require more staff to earn less money - this is not really sustainable, and hopefully something can be done specifically to address this.
The second point I don’t see on here is with regards to evidence. I obviously have an interest here but the I don’t see the evidence that cases now being detected are actually linked to a rise in hospitalisations and deaths, which sure surely be the key metric as they are what is supposed to differentiate this from other seasonal viruses.
I agree.
Here you go: (Hospitalisations in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
(Deaths in England by day - bars are raw numbers, line is 7-day average)
Where did you get this from - I`ve been looking for similar without luck?
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Can you revise your doubling period estimate from a few days ago? I recall you had the doubling time listed for a number of days showing how it had changed.
(95% sure it was you...)
Sure.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days. (The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
Supplemental to this: the rate of improvement (the bending down of the line of acceleration) has been reasonably constant over the past few days. This isn't far off sheer covid-data-wrangling, but IF (and it's a massive If) that rate of improvement in bending the line down were to be sustained, we'd be looking at this coming up as a projection:
If we meet that going forwards, I'll be relieved.
However, statistically it's dodgy as hell: a seven-day average, with the day-to-day rate of increase looked at and the difference from one day to the other compared and further averaged and using this to project forwards. I, however, am not immune from looking for straws to grasp.
Cats are perfectly able to do the same. They just can't be arsed.
So you agree with me then?
Cats aren't useless.
They are just useless to humans.
This reminds me of a mock question when I was studying philosophy for my degree: What is the point of sparrows?
Underlying the flippantly-worded question is the difference between intrinsic and instrumental value. The latter meaning "providing utility to humans" and the former meaning "having value in itself - i.e. in accord with nature".
Assuming you mean domesticated cats, they, like domesticated dogs, are a human construct. The result of centuries of genetic-engineering-by-humans for human need. Therefore they are, I would argue, part of the human realm rather than the natural realm. Therefore, it follows, they have bags of instrumental value but no intrinsic value.
Tigers, in contrast, have bags of intrinsic value but no, or very little, instrumental value. Therefore they - like so many other species - are fucked. (See Attenborough programme the other night and weep.)
There's a whole tourist industry based around tiger watching - and it's a highly lucrative industry in otherwise poor areas of India. So that's not really true
The point is that their value is (or, rather, should be) bound up in intrinsic value rather than value to humans (regardless of the quantity of value to humans).
This debate reminds me of a famous theological question/answer
Why does it rain?
No scientist can really answer that. They can explain HOW it rains, the mechanism of evaporation, precipitation, and so on, but not the WHY
A believer, on the other hand, can say: it rains to feed the wheat that grows to feed mankind, so that he may sing the praise of God.
Religion often gives you an answer to WHY, which is hugely important to human happiness.
Comments
Whilst I accept there has been an increase in both I would expect some context around seasonal viruses. It cannot be just anecdotal that every year when schools and universities go back people get a lot of colds, I would therefore generally expect numbers of people in hospital and all deaths to start to increase at this point.
I can give an example in hospitality we review sales etc generally by quarter because where a bank holiday is or good weather sits can significantly alter income and on either a quarterly or annual basis we can see what is happening more clearly.
Take a look at “lockdownsceptics,org”
Can I confirm - these are hospitalisations due to Covid - rather than total daily hospitalisations?
Yes, seasonal colds/flu are up. But cases, hospitalisations and deaths from COVID are quite clearly rising. And they seem to be accelerating.
I use the https://api.coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ - it's an API that allow you to programatically request data straight from the PHE database.
PM'd you
If hijackings were commonplace, people would refuse to fly.
The immediate task is to support as many jobs as possible and good to see we have moved towards the German scheme
The VAT cut for hospitality and the extending loans so they only need to be repaid as you grow and other measures should all be little bits to help too.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1309069443872559104
For a job interview knowledge is meh, unless it is directly being used as part of the job. Being able to interpret the available data is a much better criterion.
Last year my cat died and I didn't replace it.
I noticed two things:
First, the cat ate more animal protein than I did.
Second, the cat (through cat litter) generated more landfill waste than I did.
I have come to the conclusion that, if we are to truly "save the planet", carnivorous pets are a first world self indulgence.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/This-Your-Brain-Parasites-Manipulate/dp/0544947258/ref=pd_lpo_14_t_1/262-9404080-9691317?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0544947258&pd_rd_r=73c6561d-e6fb-4121-ab57-51fe422e965f&pd_rd_w=VswnY&pd_rd_wg=TRo6k&pf_rd_p=7b8e3b03-1439-4489-abd4-4a138cf4eca6&pf_rd_r=QVSRSS948JH14ZM5NAQR&psc=1&refRID=QVSRSS948JH14ZM5NAQR
You can create your own graphs comparing what you like - the data is on the "Data" tab on each area.
Also people die from Flu every year - we do not try to stop that at source. In a bad winter there could be thousands of such deaths.
I offer a counter to your hijacking deaths. Deaths related to cars have steadily decreased whilst use has gone up. This has been done by measures such as seat belts and better quality roads and cars. We could totally irradicate deaths by cars by completely banning them however they would then lose their benefit and utility in society. There is always a balance in these things even if we are not aware on a day to day basis
(This is the logic of those quoting low coronavirus numbers and using them to argue that the precautions used are unnecessary. Or that the economic cost is too high against those current deaths: hijacking deaths are averaging one every five years; the cost and hassle of airport security is all up against that one death every five years... on that logic)
The reason that the hospitalisations and deaths have stayed relatively low so far is that the composition of the group that is getting ill is more balanced - earlier in the year it was massively biased towards the elderly.
That will change.
(95% sure it was you...)
It will help, obviously, together with the other measures, but it's not going to stave off a very big rise in unemployment. I'm not sure he has the firepower to be more generous, though; in retrospect, I think he perhaps should have been a bit less generous in the initial response so as to keep something in reserve for the longer haul. There was never any possibility that we'd be back towards some kind of normal by Xmas. (And that's not even considering how on earth he's going to help us over the looming Brexit catastrophe).
The VAT cut should help hospitality make bigger margins from smaller trade. If you buy a meal for £10 and £2 soft drink then previously the business would get £10 and £2 would be VAT to the Treasury. For the same price now the business gets £11.43 and 57 pence goes to the Treasury. Large brands have tended to pass on the VAT cut to the customers but many small businesses, entirely reasonably in my vew, have not.
What a contrast to the PM and Sos for Health
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/ga-ia-tx-crosstabs/ca61e64eaef883ac/full.pdf
Rising = more restrictions required
Steady = current restrictions sufficient
Falling = restrictions can be eased
So, if anything, the current restrictions are actually insufficient.
So Tories largest party but Starmer PM with SNP support
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=40&LAB=40&LIB=7&Brexit=2&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=20.5&SCOTLAB=17.4&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTBrexit=1.1&SCOTGreen=1.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=53.5&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019
He dare not risk failed gilt auctions.
If sterling collapses, the entire game is up anyway.
- first question - what is this?
- second if they don't know - explain what it is, what does it tell you?
- second otherwise - what does it tell you?
- third question - what potential weaknesses are there in this approach? what can you see from the graph itself?
Just examples....
I think the rise would have been steeper either way early on, which makes sense given R is estimated to be a bit above 1 currently whereas it was about 3 at the start.
However your comment in parentheses is spot on
The Bank of England and Andrew Bailey may be theoretically independent but in reality during an crisis like this the Chancellor is the boss, not Andrew Bailey.
Current doubling time is 9.7 days. The average doubling time over the past seven days has been 12.2 days, with a maximum doubling time of 15.9 days and a minimum of 7.5 days.
(The trajectory isn't constant - sometimes steeper and sometimes slower)
It's better than it was a week ago, when the doubling time was 7.5 days (average over the preceding week had been 8.0 days, with a maximum of 11.3 days and a minimum of 6.3 days).
I think it's improving, but slowly. At least the rate of acceleration has stopped accelerating (if you see what I mean). This improvement, though is slow - it'd take nearly 20 days for it to level off unless that rate of levelling increases. I hope it improves a bit faster. God knows, I don't want more restrictions.
Almost 1 in 10 people who went to hospital with Covid have died in Houston.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/
They are of course results from their simulations, so your opinion on these figures will be coupled with your belief in the competence of Nate Silver's models.
Weird and not-so-weird possibilities
The chances that these situations will crop up
Trump wins the popular vote
Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 11 in 100
Biden wins the popular vote
Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 89 in 100
Trump wins more than 50% of the popular vote
Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 8 in 100
Biden wins more than 50% of the popular vote
Regardless of whether he wins the Electoral College 84 in 100
Trump wins in a landslide
Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin <1 in 100
Biden wins in a landslide
Defined as winning the popular vote by a double-digit margin 30 in 100
Trump wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College <1 in 100
Biden wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College 11 in 100
No one wins the Electoral College
No candidate gets 270 electoral votes and Congress decides the election <1 in 100
Trump wins at least one state that Clinton won in 2016 36 in 100
Biden wins at least one state that Trump won in 2016 92 in 100
The map stays exactly the same as it was in 2016
Each candidate wins exactly the same states that his party won in 2016 <1 in 100
The election hinges on a recount
Candidates are within half a percentage point in one or more decisive states 5 in 100
Considering it will take 2-3 weeks for it to be clear what impact this weeks new measures will have, if its already slowly levelling off that is because of actions people had voluntarily taken before these measures kicked in.
We don't need an R of 0, we just need to get R back to or below 1 again. If these limited measures are sufficient to do that then there's no need for anything more draconian.
The wrong intuition is incredibly firmly embedded- because we are used to moving on sticky frictionny surfaces. So physics teachers have to go to huge (and often unsuccessful) efforts to get students to think in Newtonian ways.
It's the same here. All our instincts are to say "lots of infections --> need more restrictions" and "few infections --> need less restrictions". But the way to control the graph is, as you say, to increase restrictions when caases are low and rising. Partly because that's how the system works, but also to avoid the scenario where the case numbers are high and rising.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1309078725732990977
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1309076308656353285?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1309074487065939968?s=20
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/sep/24/dean-jones-former-australia-cricketer-coach-and-commentator-dies-aged-59
If it is something like a shortage of reagents, it would also make sense why they have been restricting availability of test slots.
Accelleration is the second derivative and the rate of accelleration is the third derivative. If the third derivative has stopped accellerating then the fifth derivative is 0. (!)
At least if the 5th derivative is zero then the growth cannot be exponentiial :-)
I presume you mean the number of hospitsations have stopped accelerating, meaning the second derivative is zero.
All this reminds me of the famous quote by Nixon on inflation.
Something to do with people having a strong gag reflex and the person in the field not going all the way. (Stop sniggering, this is a serious matter.)
How widespread that is, I don't know.
Why does it rain?
No scientist can really answer that. They can explain HOW it rains, the mechanism of evaporation, precipitation, and so on, but not the WHY
A believer, on the other hand, can say: it rains to feed the wheat that grows to feed mankind, so that he may sing the praise of God.
Religion often gives you an answer to WHY, which is hugely important to human happiness.
DemonteDeloitte a call again to bring their team to come and sort the testing system out again.He was a player for Victoria and Australia when I moved down under as a child and started following Cricket. Really shocked by that.
Virtually nothing was made of the fact that c a quarter of the English population has much tighter regs.
And that for us absolutely nothing changed on Tuesday.
I am much afeared that we are headed for a Total Lockdown (schools included) which will be significantly worse than the first, because it coincides with normal flu season (plus less chance to go outdoors).
Remember the Covid Rule: imagine the reasonable worst case scenario, because that is what will happen
High school or less: 46%
Holy gucking shit balls.
There's correcting and then there's correcting.
If we meet that going forwards, I'll be relieved.
However, statistically it's dodgy as hell: a seven-day average, with the day-to-day rate of increase looked at and the difference from one day to the other compared and further averaged and using this to project forwards. I, however, am not immune from looking for straws to grasp.
I've also got a riff on Stan ready as well.