You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
Misleading push marketing. This book covers the tragedy of Americas drug epidemic. Currently killing as many as guns and motor vehicles combined.
Yes, sure, the guys were complete shits. OTOH doctors are assumed to have a basic level of integrity, intelligence and medical knowledge, and if someone tried to sell me a non-addictive opioid I would suggest we moved straight on to negotiating over the bridge sale. Even if I didn't know the history of heroin. Plus I popped my way through 100 oxycontin last year (legitimate prescription) and whatever anyone tells you, it is pretty bloody obvious when you start creeping from purely analgesic to partly recreational use. The Sacklers were tangoing but not on their own, any more than it is purely a handful of evil overlords at BP and RDS who are responsible for global warming.
Pill Mill prescibers have been sentenced to long prison terms, such as...
"Rovero’s son, Joey, died after mixing alcohol, Xanax, and oxycodone. He bought the pills after driving 360 miles with his fraternity brothers from Arizona State University, where he was a semester away from graduation in 2009."
...
"“We’ve reached an extreme level of closure. We feel very blessed,” Rovero told Healthline. “I talk to parents all over the country who never get a drop of closure.”"
What a thing to feel "blessed" about. This is like all the shits in this country who think it is clever to take cocaine, absolving their consciences with a class action against the Medellin cartel.
The Dems keep falling into the same trap of saying "worst thing ever in history" and then whatever it is just turns out to be merely rubbish and people think "well it's not as bad as we were being told".
Wait ‘til she issues her first couple of judgments, if confirmed. She did a great job of not answering a single tough question during the hearings - and Democrats kept it low key as they knew anything else would backfire. I predict she’ll be every bit as bad as forecast.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
Misleading push marketing. This book covers the tragedy of Americas drug epidemic. Currently killing as many as guns and motor vehicles combined.
Yes, sure, the guys were complete shits. OTOH doctors are assumed to have a basic level of integrity, intelligence and medical knowledge, and if someone tried to sell me a non-addictive opioid I would suggest we moved straight on to negotiating over the bridge sale. Even if I didn't know the history of heroin. Plus I popped my way through 100 oxycontin last year (legitimate prescription) and whatever anyone tells you, it is pretty bloody obvious when you start creeping from purely analgesic to partly recreational use. The Sacklers were tangoing but not on their own, any more than it is purely a handful of evil overlords at BP and RDS who are responsible for global warming.
They had hard scientific evidence of the nature of what they were selling.
They lied about it. And carefully orchestrated keeping that lie hidden. In order to keep selling the pills. They were clearly, criminally responsible for the result.
If you can't do the the time, don't do the crime.
And yes, lots of other people are guilty as well. Send them to the same prison.
The Amey service is a poor service, no better than it was when run by Arriva. If the new nationalised service is a bad as British Rail, it would still be better than the current service.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
What a depressingly stupid post. I have already said the Sacklers were complete shits, museums was a bonkers irrelevance from another poster altogether, professionals are not meant to accept without question statements made about the subject-matter of their professional expertise, and what is an omlette?
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
I mostly agree.
One of the key political failures is that the entire situation has been almost completely reduced to the question of how many restrictions to impose to reduce deaths or deaths to accept to reduce restrictions.
So there's no political way out. The Tory MPs who might topple Johnson will only leave us with the situation seen in the US, and the Opposition are impotent.
It is a poor service, no better than it was when run by Arriva. If the new nationalised service is a bad as British Rail, it would still be better than the current service.
Pubic ownership of rail isn't ideological anymore, it's just common sense - an argument Labour has clearly won
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
Misleading push marketing. This book covers the tragedy of Americas drug epidemic. Currently killing as many as guns and motor vehicles combined.
Yes, sure, the guys were complete shits. OTOH doctors are assumed to have a basic level of integrity, intelligence and medical knowledge, and if someone tried to sell me a non-addictive opioid I would suggest we moved straight on to negotiating over the bridge sale. Even if I didn't know the history of heroin. Plus I popped my way through 100 oxycontin last year (legitimate prescription) and whatever anyone tells you, it is pretty bloody obvious when you start creeping from purely analgesic to partly recreational use. The Sacklers were tangoing but not on their own, any more than it is purely a handful of evil overlords at BP and RDS who are responsible for global warming.
Pill Mill prescibers have been sentenced to long prison terms, such as...
"Rovero’s son, Joey, died after mixing alcohol, Xanax, and oxycodone. He bought the pills after driving 360 miles with his fraternity brothers from Arizona State University, where he was a semester away from graduation in 2009."
...
"“We’ve reached an extreme level of closure. We feel very blessed,” Rovero told Healthline. “I talk to parents all over the country who never get a drop of closure.”"
What a thing to feel "blessed" about. This is like all the shits in this country who think it is clever to take cocaine, absolving their consciences with a class action against the Medellin cartel.
I would say the difference is the level of addiction. Opiods are physically addictive, cocaine psychologically but not physically.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
You're damning Carlotta as a retweeter? She is but an occasional dabbler compared to the true masters of the art on here.
The problem is that the Tories are incapable of seeing these kids as the future of the country. They're just another expense to be minimised, to keep the taxes down.
Is it possible to give a rational account of how in one of the world's most developed and prosperous countries which is borrowing about 200 bn a year extra cash as well it is possible for ordinary families to be going hungry when rice can be had for 40p a kilo. milk for £1 for 4 pints and loaves of bread for 50p?
Does Marcus Rashford or anyone else have an upper limit on how much we should be borrowing from our grandchildren to fund his schemes on top of everything else?
Our society after the current dreadful crisis is still far richer than we were in the foodbank free 60s 70s and 80s. How did we manage?
You have accidentally hit the nail on the head with your first paragraph, even though your analysis is nonsense. How exactly, have we allowed our society to rot to the point where someone can work a full time job (or multiple part time jobs) and be unable to support a family? The answer isn't fecklessness as some posters here want to believe, it's that we've incentivised the creation of so many shit jobs since the financial crisis and forced so many people into them through a threadbare and cruel welfare system that it is now possible to be in work and in grinding poverty.
It's almost as if the system was designed to prioritise keeping low paid jobs, low paid.
Funny that. Because it is. And this began long before the financial crisis.
As someone pointed out - mechanical car washes have been replaced by people with buckets. Why is that? Why has the mechanisation of labour stalled?
Why is it that sweat shops have made a return? - and no, they have been there for a long, long time.
Mechanical car washes have been replaced by people because people with dirty cars prefer to have someone wash it, rather than a machine.
Snapshot of real life on food vouchers - my Instagram index shows no action on it, no WhatsApp chatter either. Only seen one person in real life talk about it and they weren't 100% supportive, said that only people still on furlough should still get vouchers during holiday time.
I'm sure but my point is more that it hasn't made it into the voluntary conversation like last time which means the government won't take a big hit by saying no.
There is a lot more news around right now which is probably washing it out. But I can't help but feel the government is just horribly in the wrong on this.
I like my friend's idea of helping those who are still on 80% or 67% of their wages, but beyond that the government shouldn't erode parental responsibility. I mean when does it stop, do we start giving out dinner vouchers as well because that's another, much more important meal and food poverty doesn't just stop at lunchtime.
I think it's sort of immoral when a family is so poor they have to decide whether to heat the house or give kids food. That is a parental responsibility that shouldn't ever have to happen, and frankly it's not because parents are feckless or on drugs. It's because they're losing their jobs thanks to COVID and the cratering economy. It is entirely reasonable for this Christmas, in a national emergency, to agree to keep the free school meals going.
Yes, which is why the compromise of keeping the additional support for people who are on the various jobs support schemes makes sense. Otherwise the state is taking responsibility away from parents.
I disagree. Help is not removing responsibility. Responsibility can only be discharged with capability. If you are incapable of supplying food for your children because you have no money, no job (or worse, a job that does not pay enough to support your family in the area where you live) then I don't hold that you can be held responsible for your children. By supplying some supplementary benefit (in this case school meals) to ameliorate that you are returning that responsibility to someone by giving them the capacity to discharge it. The only entity with the clout to do that is the state, and since children do not thrive in poverty it is contingent on the state to minimise that with short and long term measures. Therefore I believe the state should act.
But people in that situation already get a whole load of child related benefits for that reason. Child tax credits, child benefit, working tax credit and other forms of income support already exist as well as housing benefit. Those benefits are also extremely generous, it's that the parents haven't got the right spending priorities. I'm sure all of them have a fairly new iPhone and Sky TV but still claim poverty when it comes to keeping their own kids fed properly.
It is why I have always had concerns about UBI...it sounds good in theory, then we will get stories from the real world of hardship and before you know it new additional benefits schemes will be setup to try to help those and the process starts again.
There are other issues with Universal Benefit as well. A little-reported fact is that UB, unlike Tax Credits, is assessed against savings. You start to lose it at £6k and completely lose entitlement at £16k.
Parents who have taken advantage of the government`s initiative to invest for children via a Child Trust Fund (now Junior ISA) find out that their child reaches 18 and becomes old enough to claim Universal Benefit (if he/she, like many, especially after Covid, starts on minimum wage) is not eligible to claim UB because their parents took out CTF/JISA for him/her which the child, perhaps, didn`t even know about.
You may argue that if that person has £16k in savings they shouldn`t get UB anyway, which is fair enough and obviously what the government thinks, but my point is that this has not been well published and shows UB to be a different beast to tax credits. It was never supposed to be, they said, a tax-saving change.
Many adults have been caught out by this wealth assessment as well - going from tax credits to UB only to realise they have fallen into a trap. They find they no longer qualify for any benefit as they have over £16k and discover, furthermore, that it is impossible to move back onto tax credits once you`ve gone on to UB. So they lose their tax credits and gain no UB even though their circumstances are identical.
You mean UC not UB I assume?
The above is the entire reason to move to a UBI.
The problem comes when an army of people arrive with "Yes, but we need a special x to deal with y"
Before you know it, you have the complexity, inefficiency, stupidity and general waste of time equal to the American income tax system multiple by American health care.
Some truth in that. Straightaway I am thinking: disability benefits.
Housing modification and equipment via NHS....
You really have no idea do you?
The idea is to separate the basic costs of living from other issues.
Otherwise you end up with the same old game of a bit here, a bit there, and if you use the right kind of spherical trigonometry at the moment of the winter solstice, congratulations - here's 50p. Oh, and because we gave you 50p we are cutting your other benefits by 51p.
Sure, it will screw over some people. But it will screw over less people than the current system. And it might just be understandable.
It also has an underrrated effect of increasing worker bargaining power against businesses that want to employ them on the worst possible terms. If you know you can live, not well but live at least then the gun pointed at your head with "Work at an outsourced cleaning firm on a zero-hours contract for minimum wage" is unloaded. I'm not entirely convinced by a UBI yet, but to the extent that it removes power from dreadful employers... that's definitely an advantage.
The entertaining bit of a true UBI will be that without a minimum wage*, bottom end jobs will be exposed for what they are. Fancy working for a pound an hour, taxed?
So basically, my view is confirmed, you have to almost shut the country down or threaten to do so, to get cases down.
So let's have a quick lockdown and get the pain out the way early.
Why do you think a quick lockdown will make a big difference?
The process of a single case from end to end is several weeks.
Lockdown for a few weeks or a couple of months and then into the New Year with low cases and a working track + trace system, then let's invest in our country properly and properly level up as opposed to BoJo's lies and fakery.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
I mostly agree.
One of the key political failures is that the entire situation has been almost completely reduced to the question of how many restrictions to impose to reduce deaths or deaths to accept to reduce restrictions.
So there's no political way out. The Tory MPs who might topple Johnson will only leave us with the situation seen in the US, and the Opposition are impotent.
I think you're also misframing the issue, it's not a straight up/down equation of economy vs deaths. There are a number of policies that could be implemented by new, competent leadership. It would require the current leadership to admit they were wrong and change the path of the to something completely new and we know that is never going to happen, not the politicians or the scientists.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
Some of us more stuck than others. I gather Johnson toured the Commons tea room today, joshing and blustering with his cronies whilst some of us up North have to meet our friends in cold back gardens.
One Rule and all that...
It does give an excuse to get out of going to some places though.
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
You're damning Carlotta as a retweeter? She is but an occasional dabbler compared to the true masters of the art on here.
For someone not on the twattesphere I appreciate the tweets from Carlotta and Scott.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
What a depressingly stupid post. I have already said the Sacklers were complete shits, museums was a bonkers irrelevance from another poster altogether, professionals are not meant to accept without question statements made about the subject-matter of their professional expertise, and what is an omlette?
That wasn't a criticism of you, it was a criticism of Charles. Since as you say the museum point was from another poster why did you think it was directed at you? Calm the f*ck down.
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
#Toryscum
Careful! You know where that sort of sharp tongue got Angela Rayner.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
This is an absolutely horrendous headline to have up given in the article it is revealed (Apparently) the triallist took the placebo and then died of Covid.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
8 billion and under a half dozen offences admitted is probably a good deal for them.
They and the Sacklers both should have been crushed out of existence. They've immiserated millions, cost the US taxpayer billions and profited immensely off of it. Break up Purdue, and hit the Sacklers personally with a big fuckoff fine. That might well be what happens when the civil litigation comes through, but if a company is this malfeasant it shouldn't exist.
I recall that there's a PBer who thinks the Sacklers should be given a bit of leeway due to good works for the Arts/charidee. Perhaps he'll be along shortly..
You just missed him -- singing the same old story -- at 9.31 pm.
So I did! My predictive powers only a little late.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
Solidly above one then.
Apart from dipping below 1 all over the place... I would say that it is marginally above 1 in most places and that data is 5 days old. We shall see.....
Thanks once again, Stodge, for your thoughtful analysis.
I'm glad you mention your concerns about Quinnipiac. I share them. They have a decent rating but have leaned heavily towards Biden throughout the contest and I suspect they have an inbuilt bias somehow.
The National and State polls seem to be converging somewhat. I find that reassuring. It suggests to me that the overall position remains stable and that Biden remains on course for a comfortable win.
Thank you, my friend. I can't believe it'll be an empty house for a Lingfield jump meeting tomorrow. My friend watched Plumpton last Sunday from the station bridge.
We are now seeing clear signs of panic from within American conservatism. They are presumably paying for polls which purport to show Trump still having a chance to try to galvanise what's left of their base and to de-stabilise the Biden campaign.
As part of this, out come any number of tweets claiming the Biden campaign is in trouble and they aren't getting the votes in the swing states and so on and so forth while the tone of opinion articles is becoming increasingly vitriolic and desperate.
I don't know where American conservatism goes if Biden wins and the Democrats take the Senate as well. It will be the first shut out since 2008 but that didn't last long. I'm far from convinced Trump-ism will outlive Trump and the GOP will revert in the next 12-18 months to a more traditional conservative outlook which may resonate against Biden's more progressive outlook in 2022.
A major split between the Trumpists and the traditional Republicans would be my dream outcome
Are the Tea Party going to go quietly back to old-style Reps? Are the rust belt non-college white males?
For different reasons, my dream scenario too. The GOP need to be humiliated, not just beaten. Otherwise, they won't learn and improve.
Even if Trump wins he will almost certainly lose the popular vote, so the Bush family via George W and Bush Snr will remain the only Republican presidential nominees since Reagan to have got over 50% of the vote.
If the GOP want to win convincingly again they therefore need to look back to the Bushes
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
#Toryscum
Careful! You know where that sort of sharp tongue got Angela Rayner.
Such labels may not generally be helpful for more than making people better about themselves, but scum is pretty mild as far as internet talk goes, and only her position and the context of parliamentary debate made it particularly notable, not that the target hasn't sought to milk it.
It is a poor service, no better than it was when run by Arriva. If the new nationalised service is a bad as British Rail, it would still be better than the current service.
Pubic ownership of rail isn't ideological anymore, it's just common sense - an argument Labour has clearly won
Not if you look at the huge improvements in the current system compared with the nationalised version. Just look for example at the cross-country comparisons made by the EU over many years.
It's a deluded, deranged idea.
The Welsh govt are a collection of blithering ignorami. But the Welsh will have to lie in the bed being created for them.
Then the idiots who run Wales will continue with their idioting until they have been banging their heads on the wall for a couple of decades.
It is a poor service, no better than it was when run by Arriva. If the new nationalised service is a bad as British Rail, it would still be better than the current service.
Pubic ownership of rail isn't ideological anymore, it's just common sense - an argument Labour has clearly won
Not if you look at the huge improvements in the current system compared with the nationalised version. Just look for example at the cross-country comparisons made by the EU over many years.
The Welsh govt are a collection of blithering ignorami. They will have to lie in the bed they are creating.
Won't stop them though. The idiots who run Wales will continue with their idioting until they have been banging their heads on the wall for a couple of decades.
Glad I don't live there.
ROFL, the railways receive more subsidies now than British Rail ever did, that's the reason for the improvements.
South Western Failway is still learning what "on time" means, they seem to think it means an hour late
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
#Toryscum
Careful! You know where that sort of sharp tongue got Angela Rayner.
Such labels may not generally be helpful for more than making people better about themselves, but scum is pretty mild as far as internet talk goes, and only her position and the context of parliamentary debate made it particularly notable, not that the target hasn't sought to milk it.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
What a depressingly stupid post. I have already said the Sacklers were complete shits, museums was a bonkers irrelevance from another poster altogether, professionals are not meant to accept without question statements made about the subject-matter of their professional expertise, and what is an omlette?
That wasn't a criticism of you, it was a criticism of Charles. Since as you say the museum point was from another poster why did you think it was directed at you? Calm the f*ck down.
Ah ok sorry. But you were replying to someone, replying to me.
This is about personal responsibility, though. It's like those whiny students at Cambridge who think that global warming is caused 100% by investments in Shell and 0% by their insistence on their own God given right to have the oil fired central heating on at all times.
She wouldn't have been nominated if she'd be any good. You only have to look at the GOP glee when RBG died to see what they are up to. They sure as hell aren't trying to make America more just.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
It is a poor service, no better than it was when run by Arriva. If the new nationalised service is a bad as British Rail, it would still be better than the current service.
Pubic ownership of rail isn't ideological anymore, it's just common sense - an argument Labour has clearly won
Not if you look at the huge improvements in the current system compared with the nationalised version. Just look for example at the cross-country comparisons made by the EU over many years.
It's a deluded, deranged idea.
The Welsh govt are a collection of blithering ignorami. But the Welsh will have to lie in the bed being created for them.
Then the idiots who run Wales will continue with their idioting until they have been banging their heads on the wall for a couple of decades.
See Sunak will announce extra support for tier 2 business tomorrow
Now London is on tier 2
3 months after Manc has been in tier 2
3 months since Oldham has been in stronger restrictions that tier 3
We know our place
All very predictable. Doubtless they'll get their nationalised, heavily subsidised, extremely cheap public transport network bailed out while they're at it.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
Yes - twitter.com . Twitter is a website. Terminal programs can be installed on some devices to make it easy to post there and to follow what certain users have posted there. If you want to look at the "tweets" (i.e. posts to the said website) by the user with handle say "realdonaldtrump", just point your web browser at twitter.com/realdonaldtrump. You don't need a phone or an account. Use a web browser to look at the website as you would at any other.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
I mostly agree.
One of the key political failures is that the entire situation has been almost completely reduced to the question of how many restrictions to impose to reduce deaths or deaths to accept to reduce restrictions.
So there's no political way out. The Tory MPs who might topple Johnson will only leave us with the situation seen in the US, and the Opposition are impotent.
I think you're also misframing the issue, it's not a straight up/down equation of economy vs deaths. There are a number of policies that could be implemented by new, competent leadership. It would require the current leadership to admit they were wrong and change the path of the to something completely new and we know that is never going to happen, not the politicians or the scientists.
The framing I identify is the one that dominates the media and MPs. It's not my framing.
But it means the changes that you identify, that have a chance of improving the situation, aren't receiving the attention to be seen as an alternative.
It's why public support for restrictions is still so high. They think it's the only way to stop mass death.
It's a massive failure of the media that the debate they're fixated on is the fake debate with the lockdown sceptics, rather than with alternatives that might work.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
Those numbers don't match what I've just pulled in from the API with my python script using the same Excel formula, for the 16th I have these numbers:
UK 1.05
England 1.04 Northern Ireland 1.19 Scotland 1.11 Wales 1.05
East Midlands 1.01 East of England 1.08 London 1.07 North East 0.96 North West 1.01 South East 1.02 South West 1.05 West Midlands 1.18 Yorkshire and The Humber 1.07
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
What a depressingly stupid post. I have already said the Sacklers were complete shits, museums was a bonkers irrelevance from another poster altogether, professionals are not meant to accept without question statements made about the subject-matter of their professional expertise, and what is an omlette?
That wasn't a criticism of you, it was a criticism of Charles. Since as you say the museum point was from another poster why did you think it was directed at you? Calm the f*ck down.
Re the opioids stuff, I attended a meeting with the guys who ran one of the largest US pharma trade shows on pain relief. They looked fairly sheepish but one thing they did mention was that prescribing opioids was a hell of a lot cheaper than physio or other pain relief methods hence why doctors went with opioids
It would be if the Welsh Government had any kind of track record in running things successfully.
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
The Dems keep falling into the same trap of saying "worst thing ever in history" and then whatever it is just turns out to be merely rubbish and people think "well it's not as bad as we were being told".
I think after Kavanagh, she has shown herself to be impressive under fire and of the right temperament. And even if you disagree with her religious beliefs, she is clearly an impressive jurist who said the right things about the separation of those beliefs from the interpretation of laws within the context of the constitution and precedent.
So would she have been a liberal's pick? No. But, as you said, she's come across nowhere near as bad as the initial descriptions of her.
Apparently she is an "originalist", which the NYTimes outlines as:
"Originalists believe that the meaning of a constitutional provision is fixed when it was adopted and that it can change only by constitutional amendment. Under this view, the First Amendment means the same thing as when it was adopted in 1791"
This is a new term to me. Interesting legal arguments about all this.
Her mentor, Justice Scalia, was an originalist. She has strongly indicated that she is not a mini-me Scalia clone, and will think and decide for herself, albeit from an Originalist starting point.
If people disagree about what the original meaning was (and therefore how they might respond on specific issues) despite both being originalists the position doesn't even seem to have the virtue of consistency.
I am not a constitutional lawyer, or even a lawyer, but two people making a prima facie reading of the same text need not necessarily come to the same interpretation, and even more so if they do so within the context of precedents set after text was written.
I guess that is why courts have odd numbers of judges, and dissenting views - because it is highly unlikely that all jurists will interpret the same facts in relation to the same laws the same way, even if they were all originalists.
I suppose that makes sense, but it still seems to me to somewhat undermine a bit of the righteousness of seeking to take an originalist interpretation as if it is not still coming down to a modern interpretation of the original text in the context of other precedents and so on.
For what it's worth I do think one need not be a total originalist to think interpreting the intention of older texts can be taken way too far even in pursuit of a noble aim, particularly when deciding what the writer's meant in a way which would seem pretty implausible for the time.
It’s a load of hooey, IMO. They are every bit as activist as liberal judges; just dress it up differently. Originalism is often just a convenient pose.
The problem is that the Tories are incapable of seeing these kids as the future of the country. They're just another expense to be minimised, to keep the taxes down.
Is it possible to give a rational account of how in one of the world's most developed and prosperous countries which is borrowing about 200 bn a year extra cash as well it is possible for ordinary families to be going hungry when rice can be had for 40p a kilo. milk for £1 for 4 pints and loaves of bread for 50p?
Does Marcus Rashford or anyone else have an upper limit on how much we should be borrowing from our grandchildren to fund his schemes on top of everything else?
Our society after the current dreadful crisis is still far richer than we were in the foodbank free 60s 70s and 80s. How did we manage?
You have accidentally hit the nail on the head with your first paragraph, even though your analysis is nonsense. How exactly, have we allowed our society to rot to the point where someone can work a full time job (or multiple part time jobs) and be unable to support a family? The answer isn't fecklessness as some posters here want to believe, it's that we've incentivised the creation of so many shit jobs since the financial crisis and forced so many people into them through a threadbare and cruel welfare system that it is now possible to be in work and in grinding poverty.
It's almost as if the system was designed to prioritise keeping low paid jobs, low paid.
Funny that. Because it is. And this began long before the financial crisis.
As someone pointed out - mechanical car washes have been replaced by people with buckets. Why is that? Why has the mechanisation of labour stalled?
Why is it that sweat shops have made a return? - and no, they have been there for a long, long time.
Mechanical car washes have been replaced by people because people with dirty cars prefer to have someone wash it, rather than a machine.
Think of it like this, would you rather have a chef cook you a meal or would you rather a machine made it for you?
Surely it's because a person can also clean the inside of your car? Personally I avoid the hand car washes because I reckon most of the people who work there are trafficked, and I am not particularly car-proud anyway, but it's not hard to see why they are popular.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
Yes - twitter.com . Twitter is a website. Terminal programs can be installed on some devices to make it easy to post there and to follow what certain users have posted there. If you want to look at the tweets of the user with handle say "realdonaldtrump", just point your web browser at twitter.com/realdonaldtrump. You don't need a phone or an account. Use a web browser to look at the website as you would at any other.
It would be if the Welsh Government had any kind of track record in running things successfully.
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
You mean if I want to read random, disconnected tweets without any discussion being added to them, I don't have to wait... I can just go there? This is a brave new world.
I can't work out why you are so enthused that your government is apparantly doing so well in the opinion polls when they have been so disorganised, corrupt and quite frankly incompetent, certainly over the last few weeks and months. Do you approve of a disorganised, corrupt and incompetent government?
I am not of the Tory faith, but if faced with an incompetent left of centre government (or opposition) against even a barely competent Tory alternative, I would critique the left of centre incompetents and consider the more competent alternative. I was quite happy to call out Corbyn, and I am not the greatest fan of Drakeford here in Wales, but at present Johnson's bunch of cowboys take the cake.
You know how often companies pay huge fines without admitting wrongdoing (which of course is the reason they pay the fine), well I see that Purdue, the makers of OxyContin, are paying $8.3bn and pleading guilty to at least some criminal charges.
Just how hugely guilty must they have been to pay up and actually admit some wrongdoing?
Question: is that $8.3bn better going to the US taxpayer or to the arts? (Sackler Library, Sackler Gallery etc)
Absolutely incredible.
You have outdone yourself to a degree that I did not think possible.
Just bravo.
The estimated costs of dealing with the opiate addiction crisis in the US, primarily created by the Sacklers, runs into the $100s billions, not 8
It takes several million to tango, though. The Sacklers seem pretty unpleasant people, but they forced nobody at gunpoint to prescribe or take this stuff, and if them why not go after Smith and Wesson, and Diageo?
They bribed doctors to prescribe people opioids.
Ah, so you don't support museums then? Can't make an omlette without deliberately lying about the destructive effects of your drugs.
What a depressingly stupid post. I have already said the Sacklers were complete shits, museums was a bonkers irrelevance from another poster altogether, professionals are not meant to accept without question statements made about the subject-matter of their professional expertise, and what is an omlette?
That wasn't a criticism of you, it was a criticism of Charles. Since as you say the museum point was from another poster why did you think it was directed at you? Calm the f*ck down.
Re the opioids stuff, I attended a meeting with the guys who ran one of the largest US pharma trade shows on pain relief. They looked fairly sheepish but one thing they did mention was that prescribing opioids was a hell of a lot cheaper than physio or other pain relief methods hence why doctors went with opioids
And what's behind *that* is a medical system where treatment is dictated not by need but by the co-pay on the patient's insurance, and what the claims handler will authorise. Scapegoating is still scapegoating, even when the scapegoat had it coming in spades redoubled.
It would be if the Welsh Government had any kind of track record in running things successfully.
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
Yes - twitter.com . Twitter is a website. Terminal programs can be installed on some devices to make it easy to post there and to follow what certain users have posted there. If you want to look at the "tweets" (i.e. posts to the said website) by the user with handle say "realdonaldtrump", just point your web browser at twitter.com/realdonaldtrump. You don't need a phone or an account. Use a web browser to look at the website as you would at any other.
Ok, I had a look at that "handle"... huh, he doesn't seem like a very nice man. I don't think this Tweeter thing is for me.
Finally had a chance to look at the details of the case numbers, I stand by my original hypothesis that the R has stabilised and is inching downwards in some parts of the country. I don't think the R is lower than 1 nationally, though. I think it is in England, or at least in the majority of the country.
As I said earlier today, my major worry is that it has taken this high level of restrictions and fear to get to somewhere near 1 and this life is not socially or economically sustainable.
The current leadership don't have what it takes to put in place a testing system and follow up policies, to get the R below 1 without completely destroying the economy. The politicians and scientists in charge are bereft of ideas and until they are all summarily dumped from positions of power, we're stuck in this half life.
Solidly above one then.
Apart from dipping below 1 all over the place... I would say that it is marginally above 1 in most places and that data is 5 days old. We shall see.....
Trouble is that Micawber theory says that 0.99 is happiness and 1.01 is (eventual) misery. Just above 1 isn't good enough.
We also know that R was just below 1 in June, just above 1 by August. That implies we need the social mixing of June/July, minus whatever we need to counteract schools being open. That feels more like Tier 3+, not Tier 1/2.
I don't think this is very fertile ground for Labour. Voters know the Tories are heartless bastards, and vote for them anyway. Labour need to focus more on the Tories' idiocy, venality and incompetence if they want to progress.
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
#Toryscum
Careful! You know where that sort of sharp tongue got Angela Rayner.
Such labels may not generally be helpful for more than making people better about themselves, but scum is pretty mild as far as internet talk goes, and only her position and the context of parliamentary debate made it particularly notable, not that the target hasn't sought to milk it.
He wrote her a letter demanding an apology.
Exactly, milking it. It's one of the few occasions I'd say using twitter to demand an apology would have been more appropriate. Not that I buy her apology frankly.
The Dems keep falling into the same trap of saying "worst thing ever in history" and then whatever it is just turns out to be merely rubbish and people think "well it's not as bad as we were being told".
I think after Kavanagh, she has shown herself to be impressive under fire and of the right temperament. And even if you disagree with her religious beliefs, she is clearly an impressive jurist who said the right things about the separation of those beliefs from the interpretation of laws within the context of the constitution and precedent.
So would she have been a liberal's pick? No. But, as you said, she's come across nowhere near as bad as the initial descriptions of her.
Apparently she is an "originalist", which the NYTimes outlines as:
"Originalists believe that the meaning of a constitutional provision is fixed when it was adopted and that it can change only by constitutional amendment. Under this view, the First Amendment means the same thing as when it was adopted in 1791"
This is a new term to me. Interesting legal arguments about all this.
Her mentor, Justice Scalia, was an originalist. She has strongly indicated that she is not a mini-me Scalia clone, and will think and decide for herself, albeit from an Originalist starting point.
If people disagree about what the original meaning was (and therefore how they might respond on specific issues) despite both being originalists the position doesn't even seem to have the virtue of consistency.
I am not a constitutional lawyer, or even a lawyer, but two people making a prima facie reading of the same text need not necessarily come to the same interpretation, and even more so if they do so within the context of precedents set after text was written.
I guess that is why courts have odd numbers of judges, and dissenting views - because it is highly unlikely that all jurists will interpret the same facts in relation to the same laws the same way, even if they were all originalists.
I suppose that makes sense, but it still seems to me to somewhat undermine a bit of the righteousness of seeking to take an originalist interpretation as if it is not still coming down to a modern interpretation of the original text in the context of other precedents and so on.
For what it's worth I do think one need not be a total originalist to think interpreting the intention of older texts can be taken way too far even in pursuit of a noble aim, particularly when deciding what the writer's meant in a way which would seem pretty implausible for the time.
Were I a jurist, I think I would always start from a prima facie reading of the text and avoid guessing the intent of the drafters, unless there were well documented travaux explaining the intentions of the drafters in writing the text in that manner.
But that initial prima facie reading would of course be coloured by precedent and modern life. So, by instinct I would be an Originalist, but not absolutely so.
*travaux préparatoires
That would make you a Textualist, whom Scalia held in contempt.
The power of Originalism is being able to devine the exact intention of the constitution, rather than just a boring old reading of what the constitution says.
That's how you get how Scalia just knew the 14th amendment was supposed to apply only to the freed slaves in the 1800s and not to be seriously considered for resolving disputes today.
Barrett self describes as both a textualist and originalist. Which is pretty well how Scalia described himself, too (and she did clerk for him). Of course it would be impossible to remain consistent with such an approach and produce the desired result every time, so the descriptions often don’t make much sense.
It would be if the Welsh Government had any kind of track record in running things successfully.
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
It occurs to me that it is possible that the Welsh Government went abroad to study local government methodology. And adopted that used in a considerable part of Spain. There seem to be many similarities.
My advice, if they start trying to run a regional bank/building society.. be afraid. Very, very afraid.
That's a 23 year old footballer, not Labour. Johnson and Starmer feel like Trump and Clinton 2016 - you'd think it impossible that just one person so manifestly useless could get to the pinnacle of a major party...
Does anyone know of a website where I can look at tweets? I appreciate the fine work Carlotta is doing, but for those times she's not around, I'm wondering how I can possibly see what people are tweeting.
You mean if I want to read random, disconnected tweets without any discussion being added to them, I don't have to wait... I can just go there? This is a brave new world.
Ok. I am not a Twitter expert, which is why I appreciate the twitter posts on here.
But on twitter.com you can search for users or hashtags or follow users (I think you'll need to register on Twitter for that).
If you are looking for a website that sorts out only the tweets you are interested in I think you may be unlucky. PB.com is the closest I've found to that.
I can't work out why you are so enthused that your government is apparantly doing so well in the opinion polls when they have been so disorganised, corrupt and quite frankly incompetent, certainly over the last few weeks and months. Do you approve of a disorganised, corrupt and incompetent government?
I am not of the Tory faith, but if faced with an incompetent left of centre government (or opposition) against even a barely competent Tory alternative, I would critique the left of centre incompetents and consider the more competent alternative. I was quite happy to call out Corbyn, and I am not the greatest fan of Drakeford here in Wales, but at present Johnson's bunch of cowboys take the cake.
I don't think it entirely a mystery that someone going by BluestBlue might be be encouraged that the Tories remain the most popularity UK wide party in the country. ModerateBlue might be inclined to be more self-examining perhaps!
I guarantee that if this free holiday meals is extended while we have Covid, it will be with us for the next 10-15 years and probably expanded to basically everybody.
After covid, the reason will be high unemployment, then it will another reason and then it won't cost much more just to give to every kid
Now you might say it is a good idea anyway, but it is dishonest to claim it will just be for another couple of holidays.
We still have most of the Brown freebies despite supposed of nearly 10 years of austerity.
How about introducing food vouchers - but only to be spent on health food. Would probably pay for itself in the long term.
Vouchers have already been used in the past - for asylum seekers IIRC. Challenged and got rid of as inhumane....
There's a difference though, isn't there? Food vouchers in this case would be a bonus. For asylum seekers it's their only way to obtain food because they're not allowed to earn money.
Anyway, a similar scheme ("Healthy Start") already exists for preschoolers in needy families (though you have to wonder how far £3.10 a week goes).
Turning to the matter in hand, there's obviously a dollop of partisan politics in this, and forcing the consciences of Conservative backbenchers to shrivel a bit more. Most of them didn't run for public office to keep food away from children. But there are two things which do look anomalous about the current situation;
The idea that the taxpayer should pick up the tab for school meals in termtime for children in needy families is pretty much accepted. That covers 39 weeks a year- what are families meant to do for the other 13? Budgeting to deal with that degree of lumpiness while on benefits doesn't seem right.
The government has just spent lots (I've seen £500 million quoted) on Eat Out to Help Out. Subsidising nice meals out then claiming that we can't afford to be more generous to kids on FSM can be justified, but it's awfully hard work.
Eat out to help out has been replaced by the new scheme for poorer kids. Don't eat to help out
#Toryscum
Careful! You know where that sort of sharp tongue got Angela Rayner.
Such labels may not generally be helpful for more than making people better about themselves, but scum is pretty mild as far as internet talk goes, and only her position and the context of parliamentary debate made it particularly notable, not that the target hasn't sought to milk it.
He wrote her a letter demanding an apology.
Exactly, milking it. It's one of the few occasions I'd say using twitter to demand an apology would have been more appropriate. Not that I buy her apology frankly.
He's an idiot to make such a hoohah about it, that clip of him saying "did you call me scum" with his how very dare you face on will be played in every piece of viral campaigning against him. Long after he disappears from politics that one clip will be the only thing he is remembered for.
The Dems keep falling into the same trap of saying "worst thing ever in history" and then whatever it is just turns out to be merely rubbish and people think "well it's not as bad as we were being told".
I think after Kavanagh, she has shown herself to be impressive under fire and of the right temperament. And even if you disagree with her religious beliefs, she is clearly an impressive jurist who said the right things about the separation of those beliefs from the interpretation of laws within the context of the constitution and precedent.
So would she have been a liberal's pick? No. But, as you said, she's come across nowhere near as bad as the initial descriptions of her.
Apparently she is an "originalist", which the NYTimes outlines as:
"Originalists believe that the meaning of a constitutional provision is fixed when it was adopted and that it can change only by constitutional amendment. Under this view, the First Amendment means the same thing as when it was adopted in 1791"
This is a new term to me. Interesting legal arguments about all this.
Her mentor, Justice Scalia, was an originalist. She has strongly indicated that she is not a mini-me Scalia clone, and will think and decide for herself, albeit from an Originalist starting point.
If people disagree about what the original meaning was (and therefore how they might respond on specific issues) despite both being originalists the position doesn't even seem to have the virtue of consistency.
I am not a constitutional lawyer, or even a lawyer, but two people making a prima facie reading of the same text need not necessarily come to the same interpretation, and even more so if they do so within the context of precedents set after text was written.
I guess that is why courts have odd numbers of judges, and dissenting views - because it is highly unlikely that all jurists will interpret the same facts in relation to the same laws the same way, even if they were all originalists.
I suppose that makes sense, but it still seems to me to somewhat undermine a bit of the righteousness of seeking to take an originalist interpretation as if it is not still coming down to a modern interpretation of the original text in the context of other precedents and so on.
For what it's worth I do think one need not be a total originalist to think interpreting the intention of older texts can be taken way too far even in pursuit of a noble aim, particularly when deciding what the writer's meant in a way which would seem pretty implausible for the time.
It’s a load of hooey, IMO. They are every bit as activist as liberal judges; just dress it up differently. Originalism is often just a convenient pose.
That would be my worry. Whilst presenting it as noble adherence to original text.
That's a 23 year old footballer, not Labour. Johnson and Starmer feel like Trump and Clinton 2016 - you'd think it impossible that just one person so manifestly useless could get to the pinnacle of a major party...
That's a 23 year old footballer, not Labour. Johnson and Starmer feel like Trump and Clinton 2016 - you'd think it impossible that just one person so manifestly useless could get to the pinnacle of a major party...
It would be if the Welsh Government had any kind of track record in running things successfully.
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
"...track record..."
VG
Off Topic
Hmmm. The T9, known locally here in the Vale as the MT9. Possibly the only thing I can agree with Cairns over. An unquestionable waste of money, but if it is wasted public funds we are playing, can I raise you Boris' Garden Bridge, his water cannon, oh and Dido's £12b test and trace programme.
Comments
Too late for the October surprise surely now?
"Rovero’s son, Joey, died after mixing alcohol, Xanax, and oxycodone. He bought the pills after driving 360 miles with his fraternity brothers from Arizona State University, where he was a semester away from graduation in 2009."
...
"“We’ve reached an extreme level of closure. We feel very blessed,” Rovero told Healthline. “I talk to parents all over the country who never get a drop of closure.”"
What a thing to feel "blessed" about. This is like all the shits in this country who think it is clever to take cocaine, absolving their consciences with a class action against the Medellin cartel.
https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
But yes, future POTUS elections are going to need a September surprise.
She did a great job of not answering a single tough question during the hearings - and Democrats kept it low key as they knew anything else would backfire.
I predict she’ll be every bit as bad as forecast.
They lied about it. And carefully orchestrated keeping that lie hidden. In order to keep selling the pills. They were clearly, criminally responsible for the result.
If you can't do the the time, don't do the crime.
And yes, lots of other people are guilty as well. Send them to the same prison.
One of the key political failures is that the entire situation has been almost completely reduced to the question of how many restrictions to impose to reduce deaths or deaths to accept to reduce restrictions.
So there's no political way out. The Tory MPs who might topple Johnson will only leave us with the situation seen in the US, and the Opposition are impotent.
So let's have a quick lockdown and get the pain out the way early.
Now London is on tier 2
3 months after Manc has been in tier 2
3 months since Oldham has been in stronger restrictions that tier 3
We know our place
The process of a single case from end to end is several weeks.
The Scottish "2 week lockdown" has already turned out to be dreamland.
*Yes. Think about it.....
Pigs will fly
Jesus, I was not expecting that
People don't want to vote for a racist party, who knew
Ok very good
#Toryscum
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1319004800445485060
My predictive powers only a little late.
If the GOP want to win convincingly again they therefore need to look back to the Bushes
It's a deluded, deranged idea.
The Welsh govt are a collection of blithering ignorami. But the Welsh will have to lie in the bed being created for them.
Then the idiots who run Wales will continue with their idioting until they have been banging their heads on the wall for a couple of decades.
Glad I don't live there.
My strategy of selling out of the market is looking pretty shit right about now.
South Western Failway is still learning what "on time" means, they seem to think it means an hour late
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1318937847924076545
The only thing that seems to be certain is that turnout exceeds 2016....
This is about personal responsibility, though. It's like those whiny students at Cambridge who think that global warming is caused 100% by investments in Shell and 0% by their insistence on their own God given right to have the oil fired central heating on at all times.
https://twitter.com/home
But it means the changes that you identify, that have a chance of improving the situation, aren't receiving the attention to be seen as an alternative.
It's why public support for restrictions is still so high. They think it's the only way to stop mass death.
It's a massive failure of the media that the debate they're fixated on is the fake debate with the lockdown sceptics, rather than with alternatives that might work.
UK 1.05
England 1.04
Northern Ireland 1.19
Scotland 1.11
Wales 1.05
East Midlands 1.01
East of England 1.08
London 1.07
North East 0.96
North West 1.01
South East 1.02
South West 1.05
West Midlands 1.18
Yorkshire and The Humber 1.07
Their last venture into the field of transport was to nationalise Cardiff Airport in 2013. It would take a crueller person than me to report the extent of the losses, which have increased year on year.
The 2019 loss was a new record, far worse than when it was a private company. In fact, the operating loss has increased every year the Welsh Government has owned the airport,
I haven't got the heart to speculate on the 2020 operating loss.
Still, it is all happening in a small country far away, so people like you can ignore it, and just pretend Labour are successfully running Wales.
Jesus, that's poor.
They are every bit as activist as liberal judges; just dress it up differently. Originalism is often just a convenient pose.
Personally I avoid the hand car washes because I reckon most of the people who work there are trafficked, and I am not particularly car-proud anyway, but it's not hard to see why they are popular.
It'll be good to have a Russian perspective
a) Abstain
b) Abstain
c) Abstain
d) Abstain
This is a brave new world.
Labour has played yet another masterstroke
I am not of the Tory faith, but if faced with an incompetent left of centre government (or opposition) against even a barely competent Tory alternative, I would critique the left of centre incompetents and consider the more competent alternative. I was quite happy to call out Corbyn, and I am not the greatest fan of Drakeford here in Wales, but at present Johnson's bunch of cowboys take the cake.
Already above 50% for Harris county and indeed Texas as a whole.
We also know that R was just below 1 in June, just above 1 by August. That implies we need the social mixing of June/July, minus whatever we need to counteract schools being open. That feels more like Tier 3+, not Tier 1/2.
Lol what a load of nonsense
Of course it would be impossible to remain consistent with such an approach and produce the desired result every time, so the descriptions often don’t make much sense.
My advice, if they start trying to run a regional bank/building society.. be afraid. Very, very afraid.
But on twitter.com you can search for users or hashtags or follow users (I think you'll need to register on Twitter for that).
If you are looking for a website that sorts out only the tweets you are interested in I think you may be unlucky. PB.com is the closest I've found to that.
Hmmm. The T9, known locally here in the Vale as the MT9. Possibly the only thing I can agree with Cairns over. An unquestionable waste of money, but if it is wasted public funds we are playing, can I raise you Boris' Garden Bridge, his water cannon, oh and Dido's £12b test and trace programme.
Another U-turn!