Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Trump moving downwards in the WH2020 betting following the publication of his tax returns – politica

245

Comments

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK cases - by specimen date

    image

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK cases - scale to 100k population, by specimen date

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK case summary

    image
    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK Hospitals

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited September 2020
    Scott_xP said:
    Not to dampen things but AFAIK all the stuff in the NYT report is known to the IRS and related to before he was president.

    If it was a slam dunk tax evasion, the IRS have had him under audit for 5+ years before he became president and would have done him.

    Instead it appears they have been arguing with him over various claimed losses.

    Seem to me much more likely at some point thay will come to an end with a final judgement, saying that not all of that can be justified and be some settlement for unpaid dues.

    Unless i missed something, NYT don't accuse him of any illegality. More either he is the worst businessman ever or very aggressive at tax minimiation or both.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK test positivity

    image

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    We don;t know everything about COVID, but what we do know is that poverty deprivation and mass unemployment are killers. That's certain.

    And we are about to get a massive dose of those.
    Indeed - and the virus wreaks even more havoc on those groups. Look at S. America. In much of the western world governments still have considerable ability to mitigate against these if they occur. It really is not an either/or issue.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    UK deaths

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,081
    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
  • French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.
    It's not the absolute numbers now that are worrying. It's the increase and the nature of exponential growth that means - without corrective action - it can quickly spiral out of control.

    There's a lot of hope being expressed on here that the light tap on the brakes from Johnson last week - widely derided at the time as insufficient and a mere prelude to more severe steps - may turn out to be enough to bring the situation back under control.

    No sign of the panic you wish to deride today (that will come later in the week if the numbers breach 10k).
    It really does sound to me as if we are never getting our lives back. Ever. What if the virus spirals out of control? trumps all.
    In principle it should be possible to use test, trace and isolate to control the spread of the virus.

    The measures to essentially semi-isolate everyone are only necessary to avoid a public health disaster because the government managed to spend £12bn and not have a functioning test, trace and isolate system.
    I have downloaded the NHS tracing app as have most people I know and it seems to be working fine.

    There are a few who are refusing because they think it is either going to listen to all their plans to overthrow the world government or send out beta waves which will melt their brains and turn them into state sponsored zombies. But they seem to be getting fewer in number - maybe because they have been turned into state sponsored zombies!

    Who knows.

    Anyway I think the App is very straight forward, practical and rather clever.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    edited September 2020

    Scott_xP said:
    Not to dampen things but AFAIK all the stuff in the NYT report is known to the IRS and related to before he was president.

    If it was a slam dunk tax evasion, the IRS have had him under audit for 5+ years before he became president and would have done him.

    Instead it appears they have been arguing with him over various claimed losses.

    Seem to me much more likely at some point thay will come to an end with a final judgement and probably be some settlement.
    The IRS issue seems to boil down to the fact he kept 5% of his casinos rather than walking away from them.

    As I commented earlier on today (elsewhere) the tax itself isn't the interesting bit it's the fact so many of his businesses seem to lose money.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    isam said:
    Which is why specimen day reports are what I hold to - the reporting day just adds another layer of distortion to what is happening, with weekend effects etc.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Its almost as if ordinary people are by and large very sensible and can make risk assessments and decisions for themselves...
  • IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Witty and Valance dismissed the claim that any mutations had altered how deadly it was.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    The sector of the population most at risk would probably prefer to err on the side of caution so ,long as there is a reasonable prospect of an effective vaccine not too far off. Also I stressed I do not favour full lockdown and do not believe it will happen but if people take sensible, easy precautions lie distancing, mask wearing, etc the risks can be massively reduced for everyone. However, letting rip and going back to normal which we are hearing a lot of right now is not an option.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 4,533
    The go to pollster for Trump supporters , Rasmussen shows a huge drop in approval for him .

    Last Friday , was approve +4 . Over the weekend that’s dropped to disapprove -7 .
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    YouGov interests me.

    Keir 7 point lead on best PM which is up but overall Labour down.

    I suspect the average puts the results at something like a 2 point Tory lead over all the polls?

    Average lead with the latest 5 polls is 1.4%.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.
    It's not the absolute numbers now that are worrying. It's the increase and the nature of exponential growth that means - without corrective action - it can quickly spiral out of control.

    There's a lot of hope being expressed on here that the light tap on the brakes from Johnson last week - widely derided at the time as insufficient and a mere prelude to more severe steps - may turn out to be enough to bring the situation back under control.

    No sign of the panic you wish to deride today (that will come later in the week if the numbers breach 10k).
    It really does sound to me as if we are never getting our lives back. Ever. What if the virus spirals out of control? trumps all.
    In principle it should be possible to use test, trace and isolate to control the spread of the virus.

    The measures to essentially semi-isolate everyone are only necessary to avoid a public health disaster because the government managed to spend £12bn and not have a functioning test, trace and isolate system.
    I have downloaded the NHS tracing app as have most people I know and it seems to be working fine.

    There are a few who are refusing because they think it is either going to listen to all their plans to overthrow the world government or send out beta waves which will melt their brains and turn them into state sponsored zombies. But they seem to be getting fewer in number - maybe because they have been turned into state sponsored zombies!

    Who knows.

    Anyway I think the App is very straight forward, practical and rather clever.
    Anyone who think the government it tracking them via the app, should post on Tik Tok about it, using the smart phone with 2 cameras, GPS, trackable cellular connection, multiple microphones and multiple apps sneaking their information to advertisers.
  • YouGov interests me.

    Keir 7 point lead on best PM which is up but overall Labour down.

    I suspect the average puts the results at something like a 2 point Tory lead over all the polls?

    The overall average is about a 2 point Tory lead, I think. We are basically at level pegging or the Tories just shading it and on course to win most seats at the next eleciton. The really interesting bit of the polling today relates to leaving the EU - by 50 to 39 respondents said it was the wrong decsion. That will make selling a No Deal much tougher for the government.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    We don;t know everything about COVID, but what we do know is that poverty deprivation and mass unemployment are killers. That's certain.

    And we are about to get a massive dose of those.
    Yes but. Remove all restrictions and you still have them.
    And rampant Covid too.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Its almost as if ordinary people are by and large very sensible and can make risk assessments and decisions for themselves...
    Nonsense. Here in Spain no-one wore masks until they became mandatory - now you rarely see people without them.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    edited September 2020
    Scott_xP said:
    Unrelated fact: there was a 15% swing against her at the last election, although that may have had more to do with Keith Vaz's popularity in Leicester East.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited September 2020

    YouGov interests me.

    Keir 7 point lead on best PM which is up but overall Labour down.

    I suspect the average puts the results at something like a 2 point Tory lead over all the polls?

    The overall average is about a 2 point Tory lead, I think. We are basically at level pegging or the Tories just shading it and on course to win most seats at the next eleciton. The really interesting bit of the polling today relates to leaving the EU - by 50 to 39 respondents said it was the wrong decsion. That will make selling a No Deal much tougher for the government.

    The overall average sees a hung parliament and Tories most seats but losing their majority and Labour plus SNP plus LDs on more seats combined than Tories and DUP combined, making Starmer PM thanks to Scottish MPs
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Not to dampen things but AFAIK all the stuff in the NYT report is known to the IRS and related to before he was president.

    If it was a slam dunk tax evasion, the IRS have had him under audit for 5+ years before he became president and would have done him.

    Instead it appears they have been arguing with him over various claimed losses.

    Seem to me much more likely at some point thay will come to an end with a final judgement and probably be some settlement.
    The IRS issue seems to boil down to the fact he kept 5% of his casinos rather than walking away from them.

    As I commented earlier on today (elsewhere) the tax itself isn't the interesting bit it's the fact so many of his businesses seem to lose money.

    IIRC the IRS has been auditing Trump repeatedly - wasn't he claiming at one point that he couldn't release his returns while he was being audited?

    The superficial version seems to be that Trump is doing the "hard core rich" thing in the US - taxes are optional at that level. It will be interesting to see if anyone can join dots between the tax returns and other business documents and find something really damning*.

    *Its pretty damning of the American system that what he is doing, on taxes, is apparently legal. Just like campaign finance - which is legalised bribery, in the US.
  • eek said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Not to dampen things but AFAIK all the stuff in the NYT report is known to the IRS and related to before he was president.

    If it was a slam dunk tax evasion, the IRS have had him under audit for 5+ years before he became president and would have done him.

    Instead it appears they have been arguing with him over various claimed losses.

    Seem to me much more likely at some point thay will come to an end with a final judgement and probably be some settlement.
    The IRS issue seems to boil down to the fact he kept 5% of his casinos rather than walking away from them.

    As I commented earlier on today (elsewhere) the tax itself isn't the interesting bit it's the fact so many of his businesses seem to lose money.
    It does seem incredible that he invests in a business, it loses money and straight away he decides well i am going to buy another one of these bad boys in exactly the same sector.

    The issue is obviously proving that any laws have deliberately been broken, rather than playing the system and stretching the elastic.

    The US tax system is such a mess it is played by everybody with money, with all the deductions you are allowed if you have an accountant that knows their onions.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    felix said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    The sector of the population most at risk would probably prefer to err on the side of caution so ,long as there is a reasonable prospect of an effective vaccine not too far off. Also I stressed I do not favour full lockdown and do not believe it will happen but if people take sensible, easy precautions lie distancing, mask wearing, etc the risks can be massively reduced for everyone. However, letting rip and going back to normal which we are hearing a lot of right now is not an option.
    Ah ... that`s a different argument from the "once the more vulnerable catch it" agrument. Holding on for a vaccine is a valid view I agree, and may very well now be the consensus view in the UK.

    There is no doubt that the governemnt rationale for lockdown has changed, from "protect the NHS and save lives - 12 weeks maximum" to "minimal deaths until a vaccine - unlimited time".
  • Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
    The ONS surveillance data shows a good estimate of how many cases are out there and is not related to how many people with symptoms go for a test.

    I believe that while originally it did indeed show actual nfections were many more than were being tested, that gap has narrowed and its certainly not 5x or 10x now. IIRC it was showing that about 60% of all infections were getting tested, though that may have changed recently. I think Malmesbury has the data on all this.
  • A No Deal is going to be a very tough sell for the government if these numbers are accurate ...
    https://twitter.com/whatukthinks/status/1310607774536151041
  • Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Unrelated fact: there was a 15% swing against her at the last election, although that may have had more to do with Keith Vaz's popularity in Leicester East.

    She was also imposed on the constituency by the Corbyn-led NEC. The local party did not want her.

  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Its almost as if ordinary people are by and large very sensible and can make risk assessments and decisions for themselves...
    Nonsense. Here in Spain no-one wore masks until they became mandatory - now you rarely see people without them.
    Which makes you wonder why Spain is having such a problem.

    Its Franco-like lockdown was much admired by the press then and now. But it seems Spain is really struggling. As Lord Sumption brilliantly noted, the balance of evidence is that the correlation between the severity of government action and disease prevalence appears weak.

    Which of course it is.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
    The ONS runs a survey - a randomised poll of people to find people who are infected with COVID.

    Using their data we can plot this -

    image

    This is the ONS estimate of the number of people infected per day in England. It is updated every Friday.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited September 2020
    I'm not sure where the scepticism would have come from in the first place. Granted, common sense can be wrong sometimes, but the ability of humanity to live through disaster and suffering is both a great strength and a weakness, as it means we can get used to far worse than coronavirus. That tendency resulting in reluctance and fatigue of repeated or enduring measures should be of little surprise, surely?

    Humans are a lot tougher than we sometimes pretend these days, for better and worse.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    rpjs said:

    Gadfly said:

    IanB2 said:


    Hopefully today is the day that Trump reelection hopes died.

    Likewise, but the narrative may change again following tomorrow's debates.

    I doubt it. Trump has set such a low bar for Biden that all Joe has to do to get at worst a draw is to turn up. Couple that with Trump refusing to prepare, and maybe Biden finding something to trigger Trump (how about "You've failed as President and now we know you failed as businessman"?) a Trump meltdown is not to be ruled out.
    Might not be a bad idea to provoke him. Trump goes ballistic over something then Biden looks straight to camera and asks 'Do you want THAT finger on the nuclear button?"
    Both of them are on the record as wanting a physical fight vs the other and both probably think they would win. Dont rule it out. The organisers should be contacting Jerry Springer for some bouncers.
    The way 2020's going I wouldn't rule out a fist-fight breaking out which turns into a gunfight between the two Secret Service details and the race becomes Harris v Pence!
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Scott_xP said:
    Because what would anyone in the upper echelons of the Labour party know about the law relating to the prejudicing of fair trials?
  • kle4 said:

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
    The problem being that it is the job of the police to enforce the laws without favour or bias. Something they have patently failed to do over the last few months.

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    The sector of the population most at risk would probably prefer to err on the side of caution so ,long as there is a reasonable prospect of an effective vaccine not too far off. Also I stressed I do not favour full lockdown and do not believe it will happen but if people take sensible, easy precautions lie distancing, mask wearing, etc the risks can be massively reduced for everyone. However, letting rip and going back to normal which we are hearing a lot of right now is not an option.
    Ah ... that`s a different argument from the "once the more vulnerable catch it" agrument. Holding on for a vaccine is a valid view I agree, and may very well now be the consensus view in the UK.

    There is no doubt that the governemnt rationale for lockdown has changed, from "protect the NHS and save lives - 12 weeks maximum" to "minimal deaths until a vaccine - unlimited time".
    Indeed - although in Madrid, eg, their more severe restrictions directly relate to pressure on the health services as hospitalisations grew. The second wave is tricky to judge for any coiuntry without massively underused health systems and there are not many of those. I think the issue I have is that many simply want to abandon all sensible precautions because many are asymptomatic. Therein lies extreme danger. There is a sensible middle way which is more nuanced.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    Does he think Biden is more likely to win than the odds imply?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
    The ONS runs a survey - a randomised poll of people to find people who are infected with COVID.

    Using their data we can plot this -

    image

    This is the ONS estimate of the number of people infected per day in England. It is updated every Friday.
    So if I`m understanding this correctly, the current run-rate is that - very roughly - twice as many are thought to have caught the infection that day compared to the number revealed from testing.

    I suppose an obvious question to ask is this: I assume the randomised cohort the poll all have tests for the benefit of the poll where that have not already been tested officially? If not, I can`t see how this is helpful.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Unrelated fact: there was a 15% swing against her at the last election, although that may have had more to do with Keith Vaz's popularity in Leicester East.
    I lumped on Labour in Leicester East last election. Thought it was too city centric and required too large a swing to switch.
    Was surprised at the swing
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Scott_xP said:
    Can’t imagine the chief whip and the leader agonised too much about that one.

    One Corbynista down...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
    The problem being that it is the job of the police to enforce the laws without favour or bias. Something they have patently failed to do over the last few months.

    That may well be so, I just note public support is likely not as clear as it seems
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    How do you know that? I guess he means Biden should be shorter priced?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Andy_JS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    Does he think Biden is more likely to win than the odds imply?
    Yes, Biden is the best bet since Macron.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
    The ONS runs a survey - a randomised poll of people to find people who are infected with COVID.

    Using their data we can plot this -

    image

    This is the ONS estimate of the number of people infected per day in England. It is updated every Friday.
    So if I`m understanding this correctly, the current run-rate is that - very roughly - twice as many are thought to have caught the infection that day compared to the number revealed from testing.

    I suppose an obvious question to ask is this: I assume the randomised cohort the poll all have tests for the benefit of the poll where that have not already been tested officially? If not, I can`t see how this is helpful.
    The testing for the "poll" come under Pillar 4 - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-data-methodology/covid-19-testing-data-methodology-note

    It is separate from the main testing - Pillar 1 and 2
  • I had a thought last night re the politics between now and GE 24 and concluded that HMG will have a very difficult period to Summer 21 with a serious rise in unemployment, but on the assumption that from mid summer 21 a vaccine has been found, or we have managed to adjust to living with it, the release of the travel and hospitality and indeed night life could see an explosion in re-hiring and the return of a feel good factor

    In those circumstances HMG may well recover their popularity especially if Boris has retired to write editorials and appear on the new GB news channel

    I could be wrong but it is possible
  • rpjs said:

    rpjs said:

    Gadfly said:

    IanB2 said:


    Hopefully today is the day that Trump reelection hopes died.

    Likewise, but the narrative may change again following tomorrow's debates.

    I doubt it. Trump has set such a low bar for Biden that all Joe has to do to get at worst a draw is to turn up. Couple that with Trump refusing to prepare, and maybe Biden finding something to trigger Trump (how about "You've failed as President and now we know you failed as businessman"?) a Trump meltdown is not to be ruled out.
    Might not be a bad idea to provoke him. Trump goes ballistic over something then Biden looks straight to camera and asks 'Do you want THAT finger on the nuclear button?"
    Both of them are on the record as wanting a physical fight vs the other and both probably think they would win. Dont rule it out. The organisers should be contacting Jerry Springer for some bouncers.
    The way 2020's going I wouldn't rule out a fist-fight breaking out which turns into a gunfight between the two Secret Service details and the race becomes Harris v Pence!
    Even I hadnt thought of that one!
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124

    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Its almost as if ordinary people are by and large very sensible and can make risk assessments and decisions for themselves...
    Nonsense. Here in Spain no-one wore masks until they became mandatory - now you rarely see people without them.
    Which makes you wonder why Spain is having such a problem.

    Its Franco-like lockdown was much admired by the press then and now. But it seems Spain is really struggling. As Lord Sumption brilliantly noted, the balance of evidence is that the correlation between the severity of government action and disease prevalence appears weak.

    Which of course it is.
    Spain is having a problem now because it relaxed too quickly in late June and went for a near normal summer break. The problem started with seasonal workers, younger tourists and big family reunions. Then it spread in families. There are many other factors operation in Spanish customs and way of life which add to the problem. Mask wearing is not one of them. As to the severity of the lockdown - without it the health service would have collapsed. The Lord Sumption point is frankly rubbish.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    Stocky said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    Was 1% fatality before treatments were developed. Around 0.5% sounds par for the course.
    No - you are comparing known new infections instead of actual new infections. Actual infections may be twice, 5 x , 10x, the known infections (over 70% asymptomatic).
    That doesn't match ONS surveillance data.
    Can you elaborate? There must be many more infections out there than is known. This is obvious - due firstly to the fact that most cases are without symptoms and secondly because some with symptoms wont bother/won`t be able to get tested and therefore will not be in the figures. Accordingly, no-one knows how many infections are out there, but my guess would be somewhere between 2 x and 5 x the known cases.
    The ONS runs a survey - a randomised poll of people to find people who are infected with COVID.

    Using their data we can plot this -

    image

    This is the ONS estimate of the number of people infected per day in England. It is updated every Friday.
    So if I`m understanding this correctly, the current run-rate is that - very roughly - twice as many are thought to have caught the infection that day compared to the number revealed from testing.

    I suppose an obvious question to ask is this: I assume the randomised cohort the poll all have tests for the benefit of the poll where that have not already been tested officially? If not, I can`t see how this is helpful.
    The testing for the "poll" come under Pillar 4 - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-data-methodology/covid-19-testing-data-methodology-note

    It is separate from the main testing - Pillar 1 and 2
    Further, the following is a plot of the percentage of cases being found - worked out by using the ONS data vs the Case data reported each day.

    image
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Stocky said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    How do you know that? I guess he means Biden should be shorter priced?
    https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1310608966729314304
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.
    It's not the absolute numbers now that are worrying. It's the increase and the nature of exponential growth that means - without corrective action - it can quickly spiral out of control.

    There's a lot of hope being expressed on here that the light tap on the brakes from Johnson last week - widely derided at the time as insufficient and a mere prelude to more severe steps - may turn out to be enough to bring the situation back under control.

    No sign of the panic you wish to deride today (that will come later in the week if the numbers breach 10k).
    It really does sound to me as if we are never getting our lives back. Ever. What if the virus spirals out of control? trumps all.
    In principle it should be possible to use test, trace and isolate to control the spread of the virus.

    The measures to essentially semi-isolate everyone are only necessary to avoid a public health disaster because the government managed to spend £12bn and not have a functioning test, trace and isolate system.
    I have downloaded the NHS tracing app as have most people I know and it seems to be working fine.

    There are a few who are refusing because they think it is either going to listen to all their plans to overthrow the world government or send out beta waves which will melt their brains and turn them into state sponsored zombies. But they seem to be getting fewer in number - maybe because they have been turned into state sponsored zombies!

    Who knows.

    Anyway I think the App is very straight forward, practical and rather clever.
    Anyone who think the government it tracking them via the app, should post on Tik Tok about it, using the smart phone with 2 cameras, GPS, trackable cellular connection, multiple microphones and multiple apps sneaking their information to advertisers.
    Everyone should watch “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix.

    Quite amazing that so many people involved in social media companies are now speaking up about how their creations are evil by design. Maybe they’re trying to absolve themselves from responsibility for the forthcoming US civil war?
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Can’t imagine the chief whip and the leader agonised too much about that one.

    One Corbynista down...
    Indeed - and why the partisan CHB outbursts earlier were so funny.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    Amazing coincidence.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    All the bookies will lose money on a Trump win. He's the choice of the average punter I reckon
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,618
    Sandpit said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.
    It's not the absolute numbers now that are worrying. It's the increase and the nature of exponential growth that means - without corrective action - it can quickly spiral out of control.

    There's a lot of hope being expressed on here that the light tap on the brakes from Johnson last week - widely derided at the time as insufficient and a mere prelude to more severe steps - may turn out to be enough to bring the situation back under control.

    No sign of the panic you wish to deride today (that will come later in the week if the numbers breach 10k).
    It really does sound to me as if we are never getting our lives back. Ever. What if the virus spirals out of control? trumps all.
    In principle it should be possible to use test, trace and isolate to control the spread of the virus.

    The measures to essentially semi-isolate everyone are only necessary to avoid a public health disaster because the government managed to spend £12bn and not have a functioning test, trace and isolate system.
    I have downloaded the NHS tracing app as have most people I know and it seems to be working fine.

    There are a few who are refusing because they think it is either going to listen to all their plans to overthrow the world government or send out beta waves which will melt their brains and turn them into state sponsored zombies. But they seem to be getting fewer in number - maybe because they have been turned into state sponsored zombies!

    Who knows.

    Anyway I think the App is very straight forward, practical and rather clever.
    Anyone who think the government it tracking them via the app, should post on Tik Tok about it, using the smart phone with 2 cameras, GPS, trackable cellular connection, multiple microphones and multiple apps sneaking their information to advertisers.
    Everyone should watch “The Social Dilemma” on Netflix.

    Quite amazing that so many people involved in social media companies are now speaking up about how their creations are evil by design. Maybe they’re trying to absolve themselves from responsibility for the forthcoming US civil war?
    They should Just watch Person of Interest.

    Finch's explanation of why he invented social media.....
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Pulpstar said:

    Stocky said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    How do you know that? I guess he means Biden should be shorter priced?
    https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1310608966729314304
    I'm not sure about "true odds", the comparison in the tweet is to the models. We don't of course get many models.

    Perhaps a more interesting comparison would be YouGov MRP 2017 when it predicted a close race (I think NOM was 3/1? at the time)
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    Does he think Biden is more likely to win than the odds imply?
    Yes, Biden is the best bet since Macron.
    I think the real mis-price in 2017 was Le Pen being shorter than a well used pencil.

    Even I, knowing absolutely fuck all about French politics, took a position against her.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,065
    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Unrelated fact: there was a 15% swing against her at the last election, although that may have had more to do with Keith Vaz's popularity in Leicester East.
    I lumped on Labour in Leicester East last election. Thought it was too city centric and required too large a swing to switch.
    Was surprised at the swing
    There was a lot of annoyance from the Asian community at a Corbynite Londoner* being parachuted in. There was a popular feeling that this should be an Asian seat, not a sentiment that I agree with. It is not a Brexity WWC seat like in the purple wall.

    *I know she was Leicester born.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Because what would anyone in the upper echelons of the Labour party know about the law relating to the prejudicing of fair trials?
    When was the last time anything was heard about that Tory MP under investigation? I suppose absenting themselves from Parliament is quite easy at the moment!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    Phew, Boris Johnson is safe again!

    I saw an interesting vox-pop from Doncaster a week or two ago. Red Wallers still supporting Boris Johnson because they don't like the Labour leader- Jeremy Corbyn.

    I have no doubt things will change towards Spring of 2021.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Scott_xP said:
    Which one hits the public least obviously in the short term? That's what the public will want, and I suspect Boris knows that.
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Which one hits the public least obviously in the short term? That's what the public will want, and I suspect Boris knows that.
    What does that argument say about how he will handle the EU negotiations over the next couple of months?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Grandiose said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Stocky said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    How do you know that? I guess he means Biden should be shorter priced?
    https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1310608966729314304
    I'm not sure about "true odds", the comparison in the tweet is to the models. We don't of course get many models.

    Perhaps a more interesting comparison would be YouGov MRP 2017 when it predicted a close race (I think NOM was 3/1? at the time)
    I think the big issue at the moment when looking at the US election is quite how much the polls haven't changed (or are even trending towards Biden over time). Huge numbers of voters have simply determined to vote against Trump come what may. Trump simply hasn't got any buttons to press because people are voting against him not for Biden.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Unrelated fact: there was a 15% swing against her at the last election, although that may have had more to do with Keith Vaz's popularity in Leicester East.
    I lumped on Labour in Leicester East last election. Thought it was too city centric and required too large a swing to switch.
    Was surprised at the swing
    There was a popular feeling that this should be an Asian seat, not a sentiment that I agree with.
    What a remarkably offensive position irrespective of the ethnicity of any persons involved. Merits of the eventual candidate or not well done the party not factoring in that element at least.
  • The team in the “nerdquarium” who might make the biggest call of all on American democracy...


    Trump Wants to Discredit the Election. This Nerd Could Stop Him.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/27/business/media/trump-election-fox-news.html
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Scott_xP said:
    When you lose an election in a democracy, you deserve to. You don’t look at the electorate and ask them: “what were you thinking?” You look at yourself and ask: “what were we doing?”
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Scott_xP said:
    Still trying to work out why she lost?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited September 2020
    IanB2 said:

    Trumpy's hairdo costs $70,000 per year?

    And double that on exploding cheesy wotsits. Fair enough really. A man has to look the part.
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Which one hits the public least obviously in the short term? That's what the public will want, and I suspect Boris knows that.
    What does that argument say about how he will handle the EU negotiations over the next couple of months?
    The next three weeks you mean
  • kle4 said:

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
    The problem being that it is the job of the police to enforce the laws without favour or bias. Something they have patently failed to do over the last few months.

    You probably won't accept this, but here goes. The peaceful parts (the majority) of the BLM marches that I saw were marked by nearly everybody wearing masks, and a real attempt to socially distance along the march, although I accept that this was challenging in reality.

    By contrast, the whole point about the anti-lockdown marches was to explicitly reject, and show disdain for, any attempt to follow the guidance on Covid-secure measures. The aim was to deliberately flout the law, for many marchers.

    So I'm not surprised that the police treated them slightly differently.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Which one hits the public least obviously in the short term? That's what the public will want, and I suspect Boris knows that.
    What does that argument say about how he will handle the EU negotiations over the next couple of months?
    That's slightly differently as he factors in that a broad chunk of those who keep him in post would take a different view of disruption than the public might, whereas the mps will more likely follow the public on tax and so on.
  • Mr. D, aye. Maybe calling half the electorate 'deplorables' in a dead heat contest and spending resources in California rather than battleground states were rather more significant factors.

    Clinton was the anti-Hannibal. Her defeat was the antithesis of Cannae, the work of her own doing, to her own detriment.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    Mr Dancer, we missed you yesterday!
    To answer your earlier question, 5.6 on Bottas yesterday morning (9/2ish in old money). :D
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,572
    edited September 2020
    Why not? Sampling took place on the day and the day after Sunak announced what initially was a reasonably well-received package of support for jobs extending beyond the end of October, before it had been subject to proper review.

    Some of the immediate gloss has since rubbed off as the paltry nature of that support has become apparent. It'll continue to do so as the consequences start to loom as we go through October.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Scott_xP said:
    I'm not sure how fighting the last election in that way helps any. If people are amenable to realising they made a mistake previously I tend to think they like to feel they came to it on their own, and belittling in an attempt to shame, as if doing the 'right' thing this time won't prevent belittling, might just get people's backs up

    And yes few will see such tweets, but the public get a feel for what parties think of them.
  • Pulpstar said:

    All the bookies will lose money on a Trump win. He's the choice of the average punter I reckon

    Pulpy, do you actually know that or is it a guess? I would have thought that the volumes traded would have made it very easy to run an all-green book.
  • Foxy said:

    Cicero said:

    A friend of mine in South Carolina has been telling me all summer that Lyndsey Graham is in trouble... Looks like he is: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-biden-opinion-poll-georgia-north-carolina-supreme-court-09-27-2020/

    While I know we are all traumatised by 2016, it couldn't be that actually we are seeing a Biden landslide in the making could it?

    The polls have barely budged since March despite everything that has happened. There are 5 weeks to go and Trump is flailing around in defence of the indefensible. I have thought for a while that we will have a decisive Biden victory, and a landslide is quite possible, including down ticket races for Senate, Congress and Governors.

    Trump sub 210, I reckon, which makes the Spreads quite attractive.
    The YouGov MRP is promising for Trump. In it he's narrowed the gap by 2 points since the start of September, and that's with a sample that's renewed over about three weeks.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Scott_xP said:
    When you lose an election in a democracy, you deserve to. You don’t look at the electorate and ask them: “what were you thinking?” You look at yourself and ask: “what were we doing?”
    That's almost a direct quotation from Starmer's conference speech last week - was it meant to be? Anyway, I agree.
  • kle4 said:

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
    The problem being that it is the job of the police to enforce the laws without favour or bias. Something they have patently failed to do over the last few months.

    You probably won't accept this, but here goes. The peaceful parts (the majority) of the BLM marches that I saw were marked by nearly everybody wearing masks, and a real attempt to socially distance along the march, although I accept that this was challenging in reality.

    By contrast, the whole point about the anti-lockdown marches was to explicitly reject, and show disdain for, any attempt to follow the guidance on Covid-secure measures. The aim was to deliberately flout the law, for many marchers.

    So I'm not surprised that the police treated them slightly differently.
    You are right I don't accept it. The vast majority of the BLM marches I saw did not exhibit any social distancing. And 'intent' is beside the point. Either the law is enforced or it is not. If it is not enforced uniformly then it does not deserve to be enforced at all. And I say that as someone who agrees with the rules.

    Basically people are making excuses for those causes they agree with and wanting the police to deal with those causes they do not agree with. It is the height of hypocrisy.
  • Mr. Sandpit, ah, very good bet. Glad it came off.

    I wasn't paying quite as much attention as usual. Likely I would've considered that but can't say if I would've backed it.

    Surprised Sainz made such a silly error.

    Anyway, I need to be off.
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:
    Which one hits the public least obviously in the short term? That's what the public will want, and I suspect Boris knows that.
    What does that argument say about how he will handle the EU negotiations over the next couple of months?
    Basically, avoid owning up to any unpalatable choices for a long as possible. Bit like the virus really;

    1. Make optimistic noises.
    2. Make inadequate preparations for reality because he heard this convincing sounding chap making optimistic noises on the old gogglebox.
    3. Encounter reality when it's a bit too late.
    4. Have a near-death experience.

    This keeps the public happy in steps 1 and 2, which is longer than any other approach.

    I reckon we're currently at step 2 with the EU negotiations, with step 3 incoming.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Mr. Sandpit, ah, very good bet. Glad it came off.

    I wasn't paying quite as much attention as usual. Likely I would've considered that but can't say if I would've backed it.

    Surprised Sainz made such a silly error.

    Anyway, I need to be off.

    Sainz was just making sure he didn’t again finish in front of two Ferraris and upset his new bosses!
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653

    Why not? Sampling took place on the day and the day after Sunak announced what initially was a reasonably well-received package of support for jobs extending beyond the end of October, before it had been subject to proper review.

    Some of the immediate gloss has since rubbed off as the paltry nature of that support has become apparent. It'll continue to do so as the consequences start to loom as we go through October.
    I`m not surprised either, it chimes with conversations I`ve had with family and friends who I`m sure vote Conservative. The most common view expressed can be encapsulated thus: "they have made some mistakes but any government would have struggled with this situation".
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,263



    I have downloaded the NHS tracing app as have most people I know and it seems to be working fine.

    There are a few who are refusing because they think it is either going to listen to all their plans to overthrow the world government or send out beta waves which will melt their brains and turn them into state sponsored zombies. But they seem to be getting fewer in number - maybe because they have been turned into state sponsored zombies!

    Who knows.

    Anyway I think the App is very straight forward, practical and rather clever.

    Seems good to me, and most people I know have downloaded it, though there's one libertarian holding out. That said, when I popped into the Post Office I checked the contact tracing and found it was switched off (not intentionally - does it go off when you turn the phone pff at night?). Not clear how to switch it on again, though I've pressed the "remind me in 4 hours" button.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Pulpstar said:

    All the bookies will lose money on a Trump win. He's the choice of the average punter I reckon

    Pulpy, do you actually know that or is it a guess? I would have thought that the volumes traded would have made it very easy to run an all-green book.
    It's a guess !
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    The problem of course is that the police and the authorities have been rather partial in their interpretation in terms of what demonstrations they break up. BLM marches apparently are okay but anti-lockdown marches are not.

    I agree with the 82%. Unfortunately it seems those directing the police do not - or at least not all the time.
    Undoubtedly. Its a bit like asking people if they agree taxes should rise, the answer to which is likely to be different if its made more specific.
    The problem being that it is the job of the police to enforce the laws without favour or bias. Something they have patently failed to do over the last few months.

    You probably won't accept this, but here goes. The peaceful parts (the majority) of the BLM marches that I saw were marked by nearly everybody wearing masks, and a real attempt to socially distance along the march, although I accept that this was challenging in reality.

    By contrast, the whole point about the anti-lockdown marches was to explicitly reject, and show disdain for, any attempt to follow the guidance on Covid-secure measures. The aim was to deliberately flout the law, for many marchers.

    So I'm not surprised that the police treated them slightly differently.
    That may or may not be true but are the police supposed to judge before or during if its the right kind of gathering based on morality or potentiality of adherence to other measures when they are obviously ignoring another measure? That's putting a big judgement call on them even ignoring the non compliant elements.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    alex_ said:

    Grandiose said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Stocky said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Shadsy reckons Biden is the largest betting/ true odds mismatch since France 2017

    How do you know that? I guess he means Biden should be shorter priced?
    https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1310608966729314304
    I'm not sure about "true odds", the comparison in the tweet is to the models. We don't of course get many models.

    Perhaps a more interesting comparison would be YouGov MRP 2017 when it predicted a close race (I think NOM was 3/1? at the time)
    I think the big issue at the moment when looking at the US election is quite how much the polls haven't changed (or are even trending towards Biden over time). Huge numbers of voters have simply determined to vote against Trump come what may. Trump simply hasn't got any buttons to press because people are voting against him not for Biden.
    That's right. The cake is baked. He's out. He's a one term president and he's only got himself to blame. 2016 was an amazing electoral achievement. He just had to do the job with a teeny bit of competence and not be such an utter dick every time he appeared in public. And the worst of it is he has now ruined the pitch for every reality TV star who may in future fancy a tilt at Leader of the Free World.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,555
    felix said:

    felix said:

    IanB2 said:

    Stocky said:

    felix said:

    French cases rarely below 5,000 for a month now.

    Deaths yesterday?

    less than thirty

    The seven-day averages for cases and deaths in France are 12,179 and 64. If you take the seven-day average for cases from two weeks ago that was 8,045. So perhaps a CFR of about 0.8%.

    That indicates to me that they're probably still missing cases in France and I'd guess a younger cohort is currently being infected.

    This is all consistent with what we know about the virus. What's your point?
    My point is that many on here are wetting their nappies about 6,000 cases when double that number right now transfers to numbers of deaths in France that are less than one tenth of those who die every day from other common conditions.

    I think you are way too optimistic - yes the deaths are lower than at the peak of the first wave even here in Spain. However, they have been rising steadily and the numbers tend to shoot up once the more vulnerable catch it. I think the majority of cases in the second wave have affected the younger more resistant groups but the more they get it the more likely they pass it on to elderly friends/relatives, etc. Also we still low little about the long-term effects of this disease on those who have few or mild symptoms - but some of the signs are not good. I do not favour full lockdown or anything like it but there are measures all can take to reduce risk - they are mostly simple, sensible and far from draconian.
    Trouble is Felix the "once the more vulnerable catch it" argument has been trundling on for weeks now and it largely isn`t happening, it seems to me. Sure hospitalisations are up and deaths have risen from single figures per day to double figures, but these metrics don`t tally with the rate of infection increase (or at least the increase in positive tests, i.e. known infections).

    The jury is still out for me. Maybe I`m being optimistic, but it does seem to me that the virus has lost some of its virulence compared to Mar/Apr though I accept that I may be totally wrong..
    There was an item on CNN late last week with US research conclusion that the virus has mutated since the spring into a more contagious form, but they said there was no evidence it was more damaging. A less damaging form is I guess a possibility.

    I also think that people are now taking precautions in rough proportion to their vulnerability. Thus many elderly aren’t going out much and when they do are following the rules above and beyond, whereas younger people are mostly doing the minimum. Thus it follows that new infection cases will trend toward the less serious.
    Its almost as if ordinary people are by and large very sensible and can make risk assessments and decisions for themselves...
    Nonsense. Here in Spain no-one wore masks until they became mandatory - now you rarely see people without them.
    Which makes you wonder why Spain is having such a problem.

    Its Franco-like lockdown was much admired by the press then and now. But it seems Spain is really struggling. As Lord Sumption brilliantly noted, the balance of evidence is that the correlation between the severity of government action and disease prevalence appears weak.

    Which of course it is.
    Spain is having a problem now because it relaxed too quickly in late June and went for a near normal summer break. The problem started with seasonal workers, younger tourists and big family reunions. Then it spread in families. There are many other factors operation in Spanish customs and way of life which add to the problem. Mask wearing is not one of them. As to the severity of the lockdown - without it the health service would have collapsed. The Lord Sumption point is frankly rubbish.
    The question then becomes, does severe government action stop an epidemic or merely suppress it temporarily and delay it?
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    kinabalu said:

    IanB2 said:

    Trumpy's hairdo costs $70,000 per year?

    And double that on exploding cheesy wotsits. Fair enough really. A man has to look the part.
    Yes - that`s it! My snack for election night. Cheesy wotsits. As Trump is sunk it will be a tribute to the comedy value he`s given us.
This discussion has been closed.