On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
Yes, it's all over in America. No problems. Probably herd immunity. Or something. All gone away. No problem.
Why is it necessary that on every subject of discussion these days most people (in general, not specifically on PB) seem to split into two opposing camps that loathe each other? It seems to have happened with lockdown vs anti-lockdown supporters in the same way as with Brexit and Trump.
It's the same split with the same people.
Lockdown is sensible and inevitable.
BoZo and the Brexiteers will deny the reality, until it's waayyyy too late.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
"If"..."possible"..."according to"..."surely"
Sources please, a lot of that seems dubious.
I think the "many economists" who he likes doesn't include all of those who believe that abandoning restrictions prior to the virus being brought under control would make things economically worse:
Why is it necessary that on every subject of discussion these days most people (in general, not specifically on PB) seem to split into two opposing camps that loathe each other? It seems to have happened with lockdown vs anti-lockdown supporters in the same way as with Brexit and Trump.
Because people only consume partisan (social) media. And that happens because outrage drives traffic drives revenue.
Then, drunk on their own certainty and already in a state of combative arousal, they meet people from the other tribe, similarly outraged and certain.
Any attempt to use the last 3-5 days to prove anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete will lead to the following. The offender being lockdown down in a room with Piers Corbyn, Piers Morgan, Julian Assange and a Lawyer in his wife's kimono. For 2 weeks. With only the worst bits of ConservativeHome for entertainment.
Malmesbury - I've wondered this for a while, but do you know why the positivity rate shows a weekly pattern? Shouldn't it be much smoother?
That's a very good question. If anything, you might expect the proportion of positive cases to increase, rather than decrease, at the weekend with fewer specimens being taken but more likely to be of infected people. It's not at all obvious to me why the positivity rate should decrease at the weekend!
For me , although there are lots of permutations, who wins the election will come down to two states, FL and PA. If Biden wins FL he's going to win, end of. If he loses, though there may be some ups and downs , I think it will come down to PA. I still think the national polls are reflecting more that Biden is doing better in places like TX and GA but I don't expect him to win either or NC. AZ I think he will. I am pretty confident he will win MI and WI but I have real doubts about PA, yes he's about 5% up but the mood music there seems so volatile. So I think if it comes down to PA (which I think it will as i suspect Trump will win FL just), we may have to wait a while to know who's won and can expect some shenanigans over postal votes. So much against my personal wishes I really can see Trump falling over the line, despite losing the popular vote by more than 2016 and only just getting past 270 this time. Now I need a stiff drink
This is my exact fear – and my forecast – although I think in that scenario, it ends up 269-269?
The one prediction I want to make is that I think Biden wins Georgia in almost all circumstances.
Well if that happens he is in the White House.
What makes you so confident?
(P.S. I share others' scepticism about a PA Biden win)
I think the failed (but slim) Stacey Abrams election attempt will drive further turnout in favour of the Dems.
Look at Fulton County - Atlanta - 344,876 votes so far. That’s 80% of the 2016 turnout already.
There is a plausible scenario whereby Biden underperforms in the rustbelt but arrives in the White House via the sunbelt.
I see Ladbrokes now have Trump favourite to win FL at 8/11
And as Florida goes, so goes the presidency, generally. But stop bothering people with facts.
That is simply not true, but then facts never really seem to impinge much on your world view. Biden could easily win whilst losing Florida
Sorry but this is balls, Florida has picked the winner since 1996, and almost every time before that. After Ohio it is the state that best represents the diversity, both economically and demographically, of the whole US. If your message has failed in Florida, it's really quite unlikely it will work in the other states you need to flip.
Ohio is going to be safe R, and Florida may not be far behind.
The point under discussion is that because Florida has generally voted for the winner Biden can't win if he loses Florida. That's absolute bollox.
Yes, Florida is far from essential for Biden which is just as well because I suspect he will lose it. In the past it has been pivotal but that honour belongs to Pennsylvania now. Difficult for either to win without PA although more so Trump than Biden. Nate S did a good piece on this:
My guess is that Biden will win with PA plus one or two from Ariz/Geo/Iowa/NC. That should do it because I just don't see Trump getting close in any of the States leaning more Biden's way than PA - i.e. Nev/Mic/Minn/Wisc etc. They are all looking pretty solid.
It therefore no longer looks to me a question of whether Biden wins, but by how much. I'm reckoning a modest distance, but it could easily stretch because Ariz/Geo etc are all on a knife edge.
And then there's always Texas!
Yes - Texas is the one which if it flips gives the big spread betting bucks. I'm hopeful but keeping a lid on it because I don't want to find myself in a couple of weeks with Trump gone + a very decent financial outcome yet feeling disappointed.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
For me , although there are lots of permutations, who wins the election will come down to two states, FL and PA. If Biden wins FL he's going to win, end of. If he loses, though there may be some ups and downs , I think it will come down to PA. I still think the national polls are reflecting more that Biden is doing better in places like TX and GA but I don't expect him to win either or NC. AZ I think he will. I am pretty confident he will win MI and WI but I have real doubts about PA, yes he's about 5% up but the mood music there seems so volatile. So I think if it comes down to PA (which I think it will as i suspect Trump will win FL just), we may have to wait a while to know who's won and can expect some shenanigans over postal votes. So much against my personal wishes I really can see Trump falling over the line, despite losing the popular vote by more than 2016 and only just getting past 270 this time. Now I need a stiff drink
This is my exact fear – and my forecast – although I think in that scenario, it ends up 269-269?
The one prediction I want to make is that I think Biden wins Georgia in almost all circumstances.
Well if that happens he is in the White House.
What makes you so confident?
(P.S. I share others' scepticism about a PA Biden win)
I think the failed (but slim) Stacey Abrams election attempt will drive further turnout in favour of the Dems.
Look at Fulton County - Atlanta - 344,876 votes so far. That’s 80% of the 2016 turnout already.
There is a plausible scenario whereby Biden underperforms in the rustbelt but arrives in the White House via the sunbelt.
I see Ladbrokes now have Trump favourite to win FL at 8/11
And as Florida goes, so goes the presidency, generally. But stop bothering people with facts.
That is simply not true, but then facts never really seem to impinge much on your world view. Biden could easily win whilst losing Florida
Sorry but this is balls, Florida has picked the winner since 1996, and almost every time before that. After Ohio it is the state that best represents the diversity, both economically and demographically, of the whole US. If your message has failed in Florida, it's really quite unlikely it will work in the other states you need to flip.
Ohio is going to be safe R, and Florida may not be far behind.
The point under discussion is that because Florida has generally voted for the winner Biden can't win if he loses Florida. That's absolute bollox.
Yes, Florida is far from essential for Biden which is just as well because I suspect he will lose it. In the past it has been pivotal but that honour belongs to Pennsylvania now. Difficult for either to win without PA although more so Trump than Biden. Nate S did a good piece on this:
My guess is that Biden will win with PA plus one or two from Ariz/Geo/Iowa/NC. That should do it because I just don't see Trump getting close in any of the States leaning more Biden's way than PA - i.e. Nev/Mic/Minn/Wisc etc. They are all looking pretty solid.
It therefore no longer looks to me a question of whether Biden wins, but by how much. I'm reckoning a modest distance, but it could easily stretch because Ariz/Geo etc are all on a knife edge.
And then there's always Texas!
Any very lightly polled red states that could deliver an unexpected shock? After all some of the gaps in the non battleground states on the Trump side are not far removed from some of the gaps that Biden has in battleground states (which have to be considered "battleground" by virtue of the fact that Trump needs them!)
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
The outlier of big developed "Western Style" countries that are plugged into the world transit system is Australia. They have most of the disadvantages of the European countries in regards to importing Covid (in fact much closer and better direct connections with ground zero) and several very large dense cities.
1,451,462 have already voted 37% in the poll say they have voted
That means the Likely Voter screen says a total turnout of 4 million people
Wisconsin only has 3,583,804 voters total.
DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER.
Did you correct for the sample dates of the poll?
Corre ring for sample dates get you to almost exactly the entire voting roll at 3.51 million.
So still way beyond the bounds of credibility
This sounds like the effect that @isam bangs on and on about - the more politically engaged are more likely to respond to opinion polls - and here we see that they are more likely to have voted early too, unsurprisingly.
The question being, does that introduce a bias that will map onto the partisan split, and introduce a systematic error?
Edit: appreciate you going to the trouble of correcting for the sample dates.
No, it is the opposite way around. The sample does not have enough people who voted early.
The poll is basically assuming that everyone left in the state who has not yet voted is going to vote.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
I wonder where Lockdown but with schools open would take R to?
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Imagine somebody a few years ago saying that the police were opening saying to the public we are going to raid your home if you have more than 6 people round for a meal, and now if you say something that somebody else judges to be hate speech.
I'm reminded of @edmundintokyo arguing that Trump isn't capable of being nearly as devious as people (i.e. me) worry he might be.
I was worried that they would rush a vaccine announcement by now, to benefit from a Covid-vanquished bounce, but instead all they have is to say it's all over at the same time as it rockets in one of the key swing states.
Trump is dumb. That's way he communicates so brilliantly to his base.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Imagine somebody a few years ago saying that the police were opening saying to the public we are going to raid your home if you have more than 6 people round for a meal, and now if you say something that somebody else judges to be hate speech.
It reveals the power of a small minority of people who, with the help of social media, package their delusions and psychosis and inflict the whole countries structures with it.
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
Just about to go into Tier 3 here. No one I have spoken to expects us to be allowed out of it until the spring. Apart from anything no minister can articulate what the strategy is or criteria for leaving it other than blather about protecting the NHS. If that is the goal then it is Tier 3 until the winter is over. There is always going to be pressure on beds from now until, say, March.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
He said: 'We need a vaccine that can be used multiple times, a recombinant vaccine will not suit.
'Once injected with an adenoviral vector-based vaccine, we won't be able to repeat it because the immunity against the adenoviral carrier will keep interfering.'
One thing I have noticed is how quiet the Team Trump online rampers from 2016 have been. Now quite a few have got the ban hammer, but I am fairly sure at this point in 2016, the likes of PJW were busy pumping out regular videos on how terrible Clinton was. This time, despite all the Hunter Biden stuff, all seems very quiet.
Twitter have done a sterling shadowbanning effort on behalf of Team Biden.
Yep. And FB are trying a bit harder now too. Generally less filth perhaps. Not that I'd know for sure since I don't hang out in the relevant places.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
This is a weird thing to say when we've spent more than £12bn on it, but we aren't really trying.
There are lots (and lots) of PCR tests, but there's not much else.
There's no other tests for different situations that suit different tests. People are asked to self-isolate, but we do very little to help them do this, or even to measure whether they are doing so - we can only guess at how ineffective it is.
In the context of spending hundreds of billions of pounds on lockdown you might think that a bit more effort might have been put into test, trace and isolate.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
"If"..."possible"..."according to"..."surely"
Sources please, a lot of that seems dubious.
I think the "many economists" who he likes doesn't include all of those who believe that abandoning restrictions prior to the virus being brought under control would make things economically worse:
The bloomberg machine I have in front of money shows Thursday's US GDP growth is forecast to climb 32% on an annualised basis in the third quarter. After a fall of just under 32% in Q2.
And that's a survey of about about oooh, I don;t know, about a million f8cking economists. As it always is.
The forecast won;t completely replace the lost GDP entirely. A quick calculation by Bloomberg's own economists shows it will leave the US around 4% shy.
Of course, the fourth quarter numbers aren;t in yet, and won;t be for a while. But there is no evidence the US is not still growing. Quite the reverse.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
A very good poll for Joe, factoring in the pollster. Let's hope this reflects on the day, though like Texas I'm still of the view that Biden is going to be close here as well but not quite flip them so the 'Trump sneaks home' scenario is still there, None the less clearly Trumps popularity is dipping in some of these red states.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
The outlier of big developed "Western Style" countries that are plugged into the world transit system is Australia. They have most of the disadvantages of the European countries in regards to importing Covid (in fact much closer and better direct connections with ground zero) and several very large dense cities.
In much of Australia, the housing is far, far more spacious. There are some pokey flats in bits of Sydney....
But much of it isn't. I recall one entertaining example - an estate agent in the suburbs of Melbourne had put a full sized snooker table in the corner of *one* of the living rooms of a middle class house. To make the room feel less empty....
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
This has been brought by the same dickhead who went on a massive rant about where are all the BAME people in prominent roles in Scottish society, when the demographics are Scotland are so white that they it is basically all inline with things.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
To eradicate the virus requires that sort of lockdown but our one was enough to suppress it significantly. And I fear we might have to do it again soon (apart from schools).
Looking at where we are today, then I reckon a 3 month lockdown would be needed to get back to the minima on the various graphs (infections, hospital admissions, deaths). That's if we start today. The longer we delay, the worse the starting point and the longer the lockdown needs to be. That's why others are getting on with it while Bozo is scratching his head.
But the House of Commons is in recess, and it's half term, so I assume Bozo is on annual leave - whereabouts, who knows. Don't expect anything from him this week, despite the rapidly-worsening Covid data. The man's entitled to a break, after all.
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
Just about to go into Tier 3 here. No one I have spoken to expects us to be allowed out of it until the spring. Apart from anything no minister can articulate what the strategy is or criteria for leaving it other than blather about protecting the NHS. If that is the goal then it is Tier 3 until the winter is over. There is always going to be pressure on beds from now until, say, March.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
GDP plus as in positive GDP growth in 2020? Not going to happen in a million years. You're right that Q3 is looking like robust growth in the region of 35% on an annualised basis. But that is mostly due to the recovery during Q2 itself. Incremental growth during Q3 was a lot slower. Even with further growth in Q4 you are looking at about -3% for 2020 as a whole. A lot better than the UK or most of Europe, obviously, but not positive.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Any attempt to use the last 3-5 days to prove anything other than that the last 3-5 days are incomplete will lead to the following. The offender being lockdown down in a room with Piers Corbyn, Piers Morgan, Julian Assange and a Lawyer in his wife's kimono. For 2 weeks. With only the worst bits of ConservativeHome for entertainment.
Malmesbury - I've wondered this for a while, but do you know why the positivity rate shows a weekly pattern? Shouldn't it be much smoother?
That's a very good question. If anything, you might expect the proportion of positive cases to increase, rather than decrease, at the weekend with fewer specimens being taken but more likely to be of infected people. It's not at all obvious to me why the positivity rate should decrease at the weekend!
Less people getting tested in the hospitals/test and trace teams?
Seems the highest values are Mondays. Hmmmmmm.....
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
The outlier of big developed "Western Style" countries that are plugged into the world transit system is Australia. They have most of the disadvantages of the European countries in regards to importing Covid (in fact much closer and better direct connections with ground zero) and several very large dense cities.
In much of Australia, the housing is far, far more spacious. There are some pokey flats in bits of Sydney....
But much of it isn't. I recall one entertaining example - an estate agent in the suburbs of Melbourne had put a full sized snooker table in the corner of *one* of the living rooms of a middle class house. To make the room feel less empty....
There is still 5 million odd people in Melbourne and Sydney though. No an insignificant number, who still have to go to buy food etc. We aren't talking that they have managed it better, like say Germany, they have basically stopped it in its tracks. Without the security guards bonking the hotel guests in quarantine, they would hardly have seen any since the initial cluster of infections.
1,451,462 have already voted 37% in the poll say they have voted
That means the Likely Voter screen says a total turnout of 4 million people
Wisconsin only has 3,583,804 voters total.
DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER.
Did you correct for the sample dates of the poll?
Corre ring for sample dates get you to almost exactly the entire voting roll at 3.51 million.
So still way beyond the bounds of credibility
This sounds like the effect that @isam bangs on and on about - the more politically engaged are more likely to respond to opinion polls - and here we see that they are more likely to have voted early too, unsurprisingly.
The question being, does that introduce a bias that will map onto the partisan split, and introduce a systematic error?
Edit: appreciate you going to the trouble of correcting for the sample dates.
No, it is the opposite way around. The sample does not have enough people who voted early.
The poll is basically assuming that everyone left in the state who has not yet voted is going to vote.
Oh. Yes. How embarrassing.
I made exactly the same mistake and had the same thought process as you.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
This has been brought by the same dickhead who went on a massive rant about where are all the BAME people in prominent roles in Scottish society, when the demographics are Scotland are so white that they it is basically all inline with things.
Yes, here is the incredible rant by the SNP's "Justice" Minister, exuding hatred for "whites" with every syllable
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
The outlier of big developed "Western Style" countries that are plugged into the world transit system is Australia. They have most of the disadvantages of the European countries in regards to importing Covid (in fact much closer and better direct connections with ground zero) and several very large dense cities.
In much of Australia, the housing is far, far more spacious. There are some pokey flats in bits of Sydney....
But much of it isn't. I recall one entertaining example - an estate agent in the suburbs of Melbourne had put a full sized snooker table in the corner of *one* of the living rooms of a middle class house. To make the room feel less empty....
There is still 5 million odd people in Melbourne and Sydney though. No an insignificant number, who still have to go to buy food etc. We aren't talking that they have managed it better, like say Germany, they have basically stopped it in its tracks. Without the security guards bonking the hotel guests in quarantine, they would hardly have seen any since the initial cluster of infections.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
You are such a snowflake. We had a 3-day week and power cuts in the 1970s. I had to do my home work by candlelight.
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
Just about to go into Tier 3 here. No one I have spoken to expects us to be allowed out of it until the spring. Apart from anything no minister can articulate what the strategy is or criteria for leaving it other than blather about protecting the NHS. If that is the goal then it is Tier 3 until the winter is over. There is always going to be pressure on beds from now until, say, March.
The escape strategy is the vaccine
Yep, nations are staking everything on it. Wealth, liberties the lot. Biggest bet in history. FFS pray it pays off.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
So just because some clown does not like what you say or think in your own home , the police can come and burst your door down and arrest you for a hate crime. What kind of nutters are walking the streets.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
This has been brought by the same dickhead who went on a massive rant about where are all the BAME people in prominent roles in Scottish society, when the demographics are Scotland are so white that they it is basically all inline with things.
Yes, here is the incredible rant by the SNP's "Justice" Minister, exuding hatred for "whites" with every syllable
Why is it necessary that on every subject of discussion these days most people (in general, not specifically on PB) seem to split into two opposing camps that loathe each other? It seems to have happened with lockdown vs anti-lockdown supporters in the same way as with Brexit and Trump.
That's not the case in the flesh & blood world. Think it's a feature of online debate. Because when you argue intently and incessantly you naturally polarize.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
So just because some clown does not like what you say or think in your own home , the police can come and burst your door down and arrest you for a hate crime. What kind of nutters are walking the streets.
Sadly not just walking the streets. In parliament, no less, according to the LadyG clip below.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
The only type of lockdown that works is the sort they had in South Korea, China, etc, and that level of authoritarianism and compliance isn't possible in western societies.
The key isn't lockdown. The key is track and trace that works so that chains of infection are broken quickly. We simply cannot tolerate the level of ineptitude shown in that respect any more. It is no longer funny.
It seems that we cannot manage it. That is the depressing conclusion I hate to draw but am on the verge of.
No European, North American or Latin American country has "managed" this. Yet many Asian countries have. That is the true mystery.
The outlier of big developed "Western Style" countries that are plugged into the world transit system is Australia. They have most of the disadvantages of the European countries in regards to importing Covid (in fact much closer and better direct connections with ground zero) and several very large dense cities.
In much of Australia, the housing is far, far more spacious. There are some pokey flats in bits of Sydney....
But much of it isn't. I recall one entertaining example - an estate agent in the suburbs of Melbourne had put a full sized snooker table in the corner of *one* of the living rooms of a middle class house. To make the room feel less empty....
There is still 5 million odd people in Melbourne and Sydney though. No an insignificant number, who still have to go to buy food etc. We aren't talking that they have managed it better, like say Germany, they have basically stopped it in its tracks. Without the security guards bonking the hotel guests in quarantine, they would hardly have seen any since the initial cluster of infections.
They had a 110 day total lockdown
Most of those 5 million have a lot more space. Public transport is also much less prevalent. So people live (on average) in what, by UK standards would be huge houses and travel everywhere in their own personal transport bubble...
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
Just about to go into Tier 3 here. No one I have spoken to expects us to be allowed out of it until the spring. Apart from anything no minister can articulate what the strategy is or criteria for leaving it other than blather about protecting the NHS. If that is the goal then it is Tier 3 until the winter is over. There is always going to be pressure on beds from now until, say, March.
The escape strategy is the vaccine
Yep, nations are staking everything on it. Wealth, liberties the lot. Biggest bet in history. FFS pray it pays off.
Except one.
“It’s a big mistake to sit down and say ‘we should just wait for a vaccine’. It will take much longer than we think. And in the end, we don’t know how good a vaccine it will be. It’s another reason to have a sustainable policy in place.”
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
Just about to go into Tier 3 here. No one I have spoken to expects us to be allowed out of it until the spring. Apart from anything no minister can articulate what the strategy is or criteria for leaving it other than blather about protecting the NHS. If that is the goal then it is Tier 3 until the winter is over. There is always going to be pressure on beds from now until, say, March.
The escape strategy is the vaccine
Yep, nations are staking everything on it. Wealth, liberties the lot. Biggest bet in history. FFS pray it pays off.
I have a feeling it will be here quicker than reported in the last couple of days. The Bristol Uni study was the clincher.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
So just because some clown does not like what you say or think in your own home , the police can come and burst your door down and arrest you for a hate crime. What kind of nutters are walking the streets.
Worth remembering that what one person might call hate speech, another calls "faith" - who gets to arbitrate?
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
For most people 1984 was a warning. For some people 1984 was an instruction manual.
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
I wonder where Lockdown but with schools open would take R to?
Thinking back to August, I recall some of the boffins suggesting that; we could have pubs etc or schools, but we couldn't have both.
As we have seen. Though we'll get a bit of an idea in a few weeks time, when the effect of half term feeds through the data.
The trouble is that even R = 0.999 is probably insufficient now; all the systems for testing, tracing and treatment seem to be in the range where they've not collapsed, but they're not coping well.
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
Just as a matter of interest, how many votes had been cast early in those years?
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
So what you're suggesting is that Biden is so far in the lead that even if there was an error that hasn't been seen all century it wouldn't be enough to put Trump in the lead in the EC?
Biden is nailed on. Trump has lost this. I stand by snake eyes as Trump's odds of winning from here.
Is it coming for us again? Wouldn't be the biggest surprise. We haven't changed. Nor has the virus. And there is little immunity out there.
Yes, obvious really, the question is are you as afraid of it as you were in March/April? I sense that people are but shouldn`t be. They should still be afraid, but not AS afraid. Risk aware, but not risk-averse. That`s the future, but we`re nowhere near this realisation yet.
My fear is medium high - maybe 50% of what it was - and I think (as I would) that this is rational. Similar for you, I bet, given the sort of desiccated coconuts we are. But it doesn't work like this with crowds. Like markets, when the blood is up, you don't get steady corrections and fine tuning, you get bubbles and crashes.
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
What you are saying, if I read you correctly, is that challengers are twice as likely to have large swings towards them in the final week of the campaign.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
We already do, of course: almost every house now contains some smart device which can hear and record human conversation. If you don't have Alexa or Google Home you probably have Siri on your iPhone or Cortana on your computer or you can say "OK Google" to your Android device. And many of these also have cameres able to watch you 24/7
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
If an effective vaccine approved and available for the public (however small the initial rollout) by end of May 2020 were a Betfair exchange market, how would you price it?
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
What you are saying, if I read you correctly, is that challengers are twice as likely to have large swings towards them in the final week of the campaign.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
We already do, of course: almost every house now contains some smart device which can hear and record human conversation. If you don't have Alexa or Google Home you probably have Siri on your iPhone or Cortana on your computer or you can say "OK Google" to your Android device. And many of these also have cameres able to watch you 24/7
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
Its amazing how everybody was totally fearful of ID cards, but perfectly happy to stream audio and video from inside their home to big tech companies. It isn't even as if Alexa or Google Home are even very good. I don't use them, because much easier just to use the remote.
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
Just as a matter of interest, how many votes had been cast early in those years?
If an effective vaccine approved and available for the public (however small the initial rollout) by end of May 2020 were a Betfair exchange market, how would you price it?
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
On the current numbers, Europe is utterly f**ked with this virus. (and that includes us).
Yet people are still insisting that we, with infection rates below other areas still getting it worse, have some form of immunity that will make it all go away completely any day now.
Sorry I thought Europe had it sorted. Europe locked down longest. Europe locked down hardest. Europe locked down smartest. Europe locked down maskiest.
And yet. Here we are
This time around though, the markets are much more sensitive to lockdown restrictions, because they have seen how lockdowns destroy economies. They have seen how two week lockdowns turn into six months ones over night. And they know, that even in the richer states, Europe has no effing money left.
By Friday, Europe could be looking at a full blown economic depression, lasting years, with all the accompanying woes. Enormous unemployment. serial unrest. Severe suppression of liberty. Disintegrating social fabric.
The cure is killing the patient.
If you actually knew anything about economics, you'd have some inkling that ignoring it is every bit as damaging as overreacting.
The least damage to the economy is whatever reduces R to just below 1.
Really?
see here's the thing
If they re-elect Donald Trump next week the US is looking a possible GDP plus this year. That's GDP plus. Numbers out Thursday show the 3Q rebound will leave America about 4% shy of pre-covid levels according to many economists. Fourth quarter so far OK.
The UK? 10% down and counting with a gargantuan debt mountain.
Europe? double dip recession coming, surely.
But hey, obsess about 'R' as economic and social collapse sweep the continent, by all means.
It depends on how you define re-elect. If Trump wins without the courts then the economic and financial outlook for the US will be comparatively strong (comparatively being the key word). If he does it only via the courts, then there are going to be very serious problems that will feed through not only to the US economy but to the global one.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
We already do, of course: almost every house now contains some smart device which can hear and record human conversation. If you don't have Alexa or Google Home you probably have Siri on your iPhone or Cortana on your computer or you can say "OK Google" to your Android device. And many of these also have cameres able to watch you 24/7
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
Its amazing how everybody was totally fearful of ID cards, but perfectly happy to stream audio and video from inside their home to big tech companies. It isn't even as if Alexa or Google Home are even very good. I don't use them, because much easier just to use the remote.
1,451,462 have already voted 37% in the poll say they have voted
That means the Likely Voter screen says a total turnout of 4 million people
Wisconsin only has 3,583,804 voters total.
DANGER WILL ROBINSON DANGER.
There can be an unknown number of ballots in the mail. The voters say that the have voted already yet their votes are not yet received/processed/reported. This could explain part of the inconsistency.
That's error in the wrong direction. The more people who have early voted the larger the implied total turnout.
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
We already do, of course: almost every house now contains some smart device which can hear and record human conversation. If you don't have Alexa or Google Home you probably have Siri on your iPhone or Cortana on your computer or you can say "OK Google" to your Android device. And many of these also have cameres able to watch you 24/7
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
Its amazing how everybody was totally fearful of ID cards, but perfectly happy to stream audio and video from inside their home to big tech companies. It isn't even as if Alexa or Google Home are even very good. I don't use them, because much easier just to use the remote.
If an effective vaccine approved and available for the public (however small the initial rollout) by end of May 2020 were a Betfair exchange market, how would you price it?
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
Can't read the whole article (£), but what's the issue? If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
Read the entire Scottish Hate Crime bill, it is all-encompassing.
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
Ok, I'm open to arguments about whether or not certain things should be judged a crime, and I'm not making a case either way. But I do rather think that threats ought to be taken seriously, I hope you agree with that bit? If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Why don't we all have audiovisual bugs installed in every room of our houses then? They could livestream to the authorities 24 hours a day and make the detection of wrongthink so much easier...
We already do, of course: almost every house now contains some smart device which can hear and record human conversation. If you don't have Alexa or Google Home you probably have Siri on your iPhone or Cortana on your computer or you can say "OK Google" to your Android device. And many of these also have cameres able to watch you 24/7
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
Its amazing how everybody was totally fearful of ID cards, but perfectly happy to stream audio and video from inside their home to big tech companies. It isn't even as if Alexa or Google Home are even very good. I don't use them, because much easier just to use the remote.
The thing that is annoying with Alexa is just how often it starts responding when you haven't said "Alexa" or anything like it to summon it.
But the really creepy thing I've noticed is how often I've had a conversation discussing something, not searched online for it - and then start seeing adverts online for what we were talking about. Makes me think that my phone is eavesdropping on me and setting adverts based on that.
Reagan in 1980 and Dole in 1996 did 7% better than the average 6 days out and Bush Snr in 1992 did 4% better, the same error would see it likely neck and neck in the EC
Just as a matter of interest, how many votes had been cast early in those years?
Comments
Lockdown is sensible and inevitable.
BoZo and the Brexiteers will deny the reality, until it's waayyyy too late.
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1321494842904633346?s=20
What's the betting these last right through to 2021? Maybe Spring 2021?
Horrific
https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/policy-for-the-covid-19-crisis/
And that happens because outrage drives traffic drives revenue.
Then, drunk on their own certainty and already in a state of combative arousal, they meet people from the other tribe, similarly outraged and certain.
* depends which Tier 3 obvs.
Look at this:
https://twitter.com/buffsoldier_96/status/1321401417752563713?s=20
"Conversations over the dinner table that incite hatred must be prosecuted under Scotland’s hate crime law, the justice secretary has said."
https://www.politico.eu/article/okonjo-iweala-suggested-as-new-wto-chief-but-us-vetoes/
Michigan Gov. Whitmer: Every time Trump talks about me 'I get more death threats'
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/523170-michigan-governor-whitmer-says-every-time-trump-talks-about-her-i-get
If someone issues a threat of violence against me because of my sexuality, does it matter that whether it's an in-law round the dinner table versus a stranger in a pub?
He said: 'We need a vaccine that can be used multiple times, a recombinant vaccine will not suit.
'Once injected with an adenoviral vector-based vaccine, we won't be able to repeat it because the immunity against the adenoviral carrier will keep interfering.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8889269/Russian-professor-69-infected-Covid-19-twice-says-herd-immunity-impossible.html
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1321498558084907009?s=20
There are lots (and lots) of PCR tests, but there's not much else.
There's no other tests for different situations that suit different tests. People are asked to self-isolate, but we do very little to help them do this, or even to measure whether they are doing so - we can only guess at how ineffective it is.
In the context of spending hundreds of billions of pounds on lockdown you might think that a bit more effort might have been put into test, trace and isolate.
The bloomberg machine I have in front of money shows Thursday's US GDP growth is forecast to climb 32% on an annualised basis in the third quarter. After a fall of just under 32% in Q2.
And that's a survey of about about oooh, I don;t know, about a million f8cking economists. As it always is.
The forecast won;t completely replace the lost GDP entirely. A quick calculation by Bloomberg's own economists shows it will leave the US around 4% shy.
Of course, the fourth quarter numbers aren;t in yet, and won;t be for a while. But there is no evidence the US is not still growing. Quite the reverse.
FFS
Even the Scottish POLICE don't like it
"the Scottish Police Federation has warned that the proposals would force officers to "police what people think or feel" which it says would "devastate the legitimacy of the police in the eyes of the public"."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-53580326
Language is such a tell.
But much of it isn't. I recall one entertaining example - an estate agent in the suburbs of Melbourne had put a full sized snooker table in the corner of *one* of the living rooms of a middle class house. To make the room feel less empty....
If you do, my question was whether it should make a difference that it's in a home versus in public.
To use an analogy (and I'm sorry it's such an evocative one, but it is the easiest one to hand), if a man forces a stranger into sex against their will, it's rape. If a man forces his spouse into sex against their will, it's still rape. It is perfectly legitimate, in fact necessary, for the law to extend into people's homes in at least some circumstances.
Seems the highest values are Mondays. Hmmmmmm.....
This idea is utterly insane and insidious.
Whether their measures are going to be sufficient is unclear though.
One thing i haven't seen analysed is how much winter weather is going to increase transmission.
https://twitter.com/Ed_Husain/status/1277245024456105985?s=20
I'll leave it to HYUFD to post and deal with the usual brickbats
“It’s a big mistake to sit down and say ‘we should just wait for a vaccine’. It will take much longer than we think. And in the end, we don’t know how good a vaccine it will be. It’s another reason to have a sustainable policy in place.”
Anders Tegnell (Sweden)
https://www.ft.com/content/a2b4c18c-a5e8-4edc-8047-ade4a82a548d
For some people 1984 was an instruction manual.
As we have seen. Though we'll get a bit of an idea in a few weeks time, when the effect of half term feeds through the data.
The trouble is that even R = 0.999 is probably insufficient now; all the systems for testing, tracing and treatment seem to be in the range where they've not collapsed, but they're not coping well.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1321505804063809539?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1321504176724156417?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1321503857604702209?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1321497984937414656?s=20
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1321473378969145345?s=20
Biden is nailed on. Trump has lost this. I stand by snake eyes as Trump's odds of winning from here.
So the government just needs to hook up with Google, Amaazon, Apple etc, and there you are: 1984 has truly arrived.
https://twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1321499914141052928?s=20
I'll go first: 1.8 is my opening.
Perhaps we should stick humidifiers everywhere.
1.8 I'd put for end of January.
But the really creepy thing I've noticed is how often I've had a conversation discussing something, not searched online for it - and then start seeing adverts online for what we were talking about. Makes me think that my phone is eavesdropping on me and setting adverts based on that.