Interesting polling. Really shows that those convinced Corbyn was unshakably popular were completely wrong. I'm a big Ed Miliband fan, I hope he gets back into government at some point.
If a few more 82 two year olds with two co-morbidities pass away a few months early, well, that's sad. But what we have now is utterly unsustainable.
Your constant lying about the statistics is dishonest and should be called out.
The median age of a COVID victim is around 80, but (by definition) 50% of such deaths are in younger people. To imply that all victims are 82 is false. More than 10% are under 70. That's many thousands of extremely premature deaths.
The number of co-morbidities is irrelevant for older people. Pretty much all people over 80 have some co-morbidities. You are falsely attempting to imply that only the frailest die.
The average life expectancy of COVID victims is about 10 years. It is a utterly untrue to say that they lose only a few months of life. Very few of the victims would have died anyway within a few months.
Furthermore you omit to mention those who are treated in ICU and survive but suffer, long or short term, life-changing aftereffects.
--AS
BiB - How has that been estimated?
They looked at the actuarial tables given age and existing conditions. There have been a number of separate studies done on this, and they all come up with broadly similar numbers. This could be herding... or it could be because that's the right number.
Have I missed something really obvious, or does that imply that it is almost completely random as to who dies from COVID other than age?
EDIT: and sex, of course.
I'm not quite sure how to interpret the question: perhaps it's better phrased as "unpredictable" rather then "random". No doubt there are causative mechanisms (e.g. genetics), only some of which are random (e.g. whether a cell happens to find another) but most of them aren't known to us yet. It's likely that things not captured in the actuarial tables (e.g. plain old fitness, conditions usually undetected) are significant factors, and a good doctor could make a better-than-random assessment of risk of dying.
Is that helpful? Sorry if not.
--AS
I'm just trying get my ahead around the numbers. At the start of this we kept hearing "underlying health conditions" cited whenever someone younger than, say 60, died. But these numbers imply that was probably incidental.
On the SCOTUS case, if I'm reading the bill of rights correctly it mentions "congress shall". A governor's temporary orders are not "congress shall". I feel that particular bit of textualism has been missed by Gorsuch et al.
Yes, but the governor’s powers are limited to those granted to him ex officio by the state constitution or subsequently created by act of the state legislature. The First Amendment is one of those deemed “incorporated” by SCOTUS rulings holding it is as applicable to the states as well as to the federal government. So the state may have granted the governor the power, but that granting has been ruled not to be constitutional.
OT: An incredibly unlikely scenario - but still possible - is that Biden falls severely ill sometime in the few weeks. Harris pulls off a worrying imitation of Al Haig in 1981. ("I'm in charge here!") This swings enough folks in power to stick with Trump.
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Thinking more of the Livia/Augustus relationship and possible parallels in latter-day Caledonia.
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Alec Salmond has not denied sleeping with an underage girl.
I don't think anywhere is plausibly going to transition into Tier 1 until vaccinations have begun to roll out. By January some should have received their second dose of vaccine already and be immune hopefully.
The way I view the Tiers is as follows, without a vaccine.
Tier 1: Insufficient to contain the virus unless it's already suppressed. Rates would go up. Tier 2: Possibly keeps the virus rate flat, could go marginally up or down. Tier 3: Enough to keep the virus rate flat or marginally down but not down fast.
I don't disagree with your general direction of travel - I just think it's a little optimistic.
I'm still to be convinced the "mass" vaccination proposed is going to happen with the alacrity and ease some on here seem to think. Those comparing it with the annual flu jab forget there are twice as many shots involved and the flu jabs are rolled out over a number of weeks and months whereas there will be huge public pressure to shove needles into arms on a 24/7 basis.
Given what else we've seen, I question the Government's competence with large-scale logistics - clearly, if the military get involved, things will get done right but if there is an ideological bias toward the private sector leading the delivery of the vaccine, you'll forgive me if I have some concerns.
It may well be that as case numbers improve, some of the Tier 3 areas will move to Tier 2 on the 16th December and that wouldn't surprise with a return to stronger restrictions later.
The private sector are going to be producing the vaccines, but the military and NHS are going to be doing the logistics and delivery of them.
I'm expecting the military in particular to make a big show of their role, with helicopters and boots on the ground getting vaccines quickly to the front line.
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Alec Salmond has not denied sleeping with an underage girl.
The private sector are going to be producing the vaccines, but the military and NHS are going to be doing the logistics and delivery of them.
I'm expecting the military in particular to make a big show of their role, with helicopters and boots on the ground getting vaccines quickly to the front line.
That's how it should be and I think it will inspire confidence in many. I maintain it's a logistically complex process given those involved but nothing that can't be resolved with adequate planning and co-ordination.
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Alec Salmond has not denied sleeping with an underage girl.
Oh, do you work for the BBC?
Aren't you concerned by his failure to address this?
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Alec Salmond has not denied sleeping with an underage girl.
Oh, do you work for the BBC?
Aren't you concerned by his failure to address this?
No more than I am by my tortoise's failure to do so.
If a few more 82 two year olds with two co-morbidities pass away a few months early, well, that's sad. But what we have now is utterly unsustainable.
Your constant lying about the statistics is dishonest and should be called out.
The median age of a COVID victim is around 80, but (by definition) 50% of such deaths are in younger people. To imply that all victims are 82 is false. More than 10% are under 70. That's many thousands of extremely premature deaths.
The number of co-morbidities is irrelevant for older people. Pretty much all people over 80 have some co-morbidities. You are falsely attempting to imply that only the frailest die.
The average life expectancy of COVID victims is about 10 years. It is a utterly untrue to say that they lose only a few months of life. Very few of the victims would have died anyway within a few months.
Furthermore you omit to mention those who are treated in ICU and survive but suffer, long or short term, life-changing aftereffects.
--AS
BiB - How has that been estimated?
They looked at the actuarial tables given age and existing conditions. There have been a number of separate studies done on this, and they all come up with broadly similar numbers. This could be herding... or it could be because that's the right number.
Have I missed something really obvious, or does that imply that it is almost completely random as to who dies from COVID other than age?
EDIT: and sex, of course.
I'm not quite sure how to interpret the question: perhaps it's better phrased as "unpredictable" rather then "random". No doubt there are causative mechanisms (e.g. genetics), only some of which are random (e.g. whether a cell happens to find another) but most of them aren't known to us yet. It's likely that things not captured in the actuarial tables (e.g. plain old fitness, conditions usually undetected) are significant factors, and a good doctor could make a better-than-random assessment of risk of dying.
Is that helpful? Sorry if not.
--AS
I'm just trying get my ahead around the numbers. At the start of this we kept hearing "underlying health conditions" cited whenever someone younger than, say 60, died. But these numbers imply that was probably incidental.
Yes, I see. The analyses are, as far as I know, for the whole cohort of those dying. My guess would be that for under 60s it often *will* be the case that the virus exploited a pre-existing weakness (such as asthma or diabetes, or more seriously CF or MS) but I haven't seen an analysis of younger victims.
I vaguely remember some statistic about the number of deaths in the (relatively) very young with no pre-existing conditions, under 40s or something, and it was extremely small suggesting that mortality in the young is heavily skewed by pre-existing conditions, but I don't know if the most relevant conditions have been identified. Foxy may know more about this, since he's a clinician.
Such knowledge would be very helpful in the design of the vaccination schedule, of course! The government rules on who counts as "vulnerable" for flu vaccines seems to change from year to year. Some years I am invited because of a neurological condition, some years not. This year I was invited for a flu jab (though in fact I had already been given one by my employer) and then a few weeks later got a letter saying that the invite had been made in error on the grounds that I'd had glandular fever 25 years ago, and rescinding the offer!
If Yanis hates them, they're probably good for the world.
He gets a ridiculous amount of press and uncritical adulation from some quarters for a bloke who only lasted 6 months as chancellor of Greece and left with it still in a total mess.
The private sector are going to be producing the vaccines, but the military and NHS are going to be doing the logistics and delivery of them.
I'm expecting the military in particular to make a big show of their role, with helicopters and boots on the ground getting vaccines quickly to the front line.
That's how it should be and I think it will inspire confidence in many. I maintain it's a logistically complex process given those involved but nothing that can't be resolved with adequate planning and co-ordination.
The logistics of the temperature-controlled vaccines especially are going to be a nightmare, but there's a lot of planning going into the distribution.
The production has already been scaled-up by the manufacturers, underwritten by governments so millions of doses will be available immediately on approval - there will be nurses with vaccines in care homes within hours.
That's rubbish. I'm in Ashford, which has a well below national average rate, so am a bit miffed. But Swale and Thanet were (I think) first and third in the country. I play golf at Boughton, which is on the edge of Swale, Canterbury and Thanet, and that's less than 10 miles away.
Yes, I'm slightly peeved but there has to be a boundary somewhere. The issue is the two Isles of Sheppy and Thanet where, as anyone who has been there will tell you, the poverty is shocking (esp in the former). I'm more pissed off about the gridlock that Mr Farage's antics half a decade ago will bring about in a few weeks.
That's rubbish. I'm in Ashford, which has a well below national average rate, so am a bit miffed. But Swale and Thanet were (I think) first and third in the country. I play golf at Boughton, which is on the edge of Swale, Canterbury and Thanet, and that's less than 10 miles away.
Yes, I'm slightly peeved but there has to be a boundary somewhere. The issue is the two Isles of Sheppy and Thanet where, as anyone who has been there will tell you, the poverty is shocking (esp in the former). I'm more pissed off about the gridlock that Mr Farage's antics half a decade ago will bring about in a few weeks.
Yes, but if we assume there was a punctuation error, he’s saying that insane people were really angry.
That's how it should be and I think it will inspire confidence in many. I maintain it's a logistically complex process given those involved but nothing that can't be resolved with adequate planning and co-ordination.
The logistics of the temperature-controlled vaccines especially are going to be a nightmare, but there's a lot of planning going into the distribution.
The production has already been scaled-up by the manufacturers, underwritten by governments so millions of doses will be available immediately on approval - there will be nurses with vaccines in care homes within hours.
The problem is they'll have to come back three weeks later to do the second dose so they need to do "everyone" in a particular tranche or cohort (very grown up words) within a 3-week window before they repeat the whole process.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
That's how it should be and I think it will inspire confidence in many. I maintain it's a logistically complex process given those involved but nothing that can't be resolved with adequate planning and co-ordination.
The logistics of the temperature-controlled vaccines especially are going to be a nightmare, but there's a lot of planning going into the distribution.
The production has already been scaled-up by the manufacturers, underwritten by governments so millions of doses will be available immediately on approval - there will be nurses with vaccines in care homes within hours.
The problem is they'll have to come back three weeks later to do the second dose so they need to do "everyone" in a particular tranche or cohort (very grown up words) within a 3-week window before they repeat the whole process.
Yes, the logistics are going to go in waves, with the second dose for the first tranche underway as the first doses go to the second tranche in the same area.
Interesting polling. Really shows that those convinced Corbyn was unshakably popular were completely wrong. I'm a big Ed Miliband fan, I hope he gets back into government at some point.
Labour List also skews left even for Labour members, and I think their polls with Survation are just website polls with a bit of a polish, rather than fully weighted.
Their leadership poll had Long-Bailey winning, so Starmer's result here isn't quite so shocking as it looks.
Milliband is popular because he took over when Starmer wasn't around recently and the left left made a big thing of how well he did. It gave a lot of people who are anti-Starmer a chance to mock Boris, which they normally aren't allowed to do when it's normal PMQs (because Starmer is the bigger enemy).
Even though Edinburgh has below average cases numbers it's stubborn flatlining is getting on my nerves. I'd happily take some Tier upgrading to get it to start falling.
It seems bizarre in the extreme, it looks like buying money. There must be more to it, but what could it be? Why aren't shrewd gamblers with millions in the bank making it 1.01?
Or are they laying both sides to artificially back Biden, whilst keeping the price up?
Since election night I think something close to 400-500ish million has gone on Biden.
Wiser PBers than me have pointed to evidence of a whale supporting Trump.
But let's go back a step -- shrewd players with millions in the bank have many larger markets to exploit. A 1.01 Biden sure thing is great if it pays out tomorrow. 1% over two months is less attractive weighed against the stock market or similar.
I assume the Trump "bets" are simply people fed up with waiting for their money and clicking the close-out button.
If you were going to give up on BF then some ridiculous shit might be the thing.
The Paddys will give up on BF.
They need to settle though as they're already clearly in breech of their own terms. Every bet now placed is a potential legal case.
They may void.
I think if they void they will have a lot more legal cases, but I do agree that every bet they are taking now is a potential legal case.
When I used to visit the track regularly, bookmakers were pretty careful not to take bets once the race had started. I never heard of one taking a bet after the result had been announced, never mind weeks later. I doubt it would be legal.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
If I were being cynical, I'd say those putting wealth before health were more afraid that any economic consequences would be profoundly negative for the Conservatives and might lead to their replacement in Government by Labour.
If the cost of preventing Labour getting into Government was to be the deaths of a few hundred "sick oldies" or "obese slobs" (as someone on here described them), it would be a price well worth paying.
For some, the nightmare is not a virus running wild through the population but the Labour Party in Government.
That of course would be absurdly cynical though, wouldn't it?
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Not to mention the argument that Covid-19 victims would have died in a few months anyway is a defence not even Dr Shipman's lawyer would have used.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Not to mention the argument that Covid-19 victims would have died in a few months anyway is a defence not even Dr Shipman's lawyer would have used.
How many people are dying because they're not having their treatment for other illnesses, or haven't been diagnosed because they haven't been out of their house for ages?
What's the point? The attackers are probably poor parents (this is not a reflection on people in Dundee or Scotland as a whole, more on the kind of people who attack teachers, they have nothing to lose from doing so) or kids. So you spend a fortune in court with nothing to show for it.
We could check with BigG, but I am not even sure Welsh Conservatives take Paul Davies too seriously.
Is there any politician in Wales that anyone takes seriously right now?
I take Neil McEvoy quite seriously ... though I think you once described him on pb,com "as madder than Mad Jack McMad, the winner of last year's "Mr. Madman" competition".
I have a reasonably high opinion of Eluned Morgan, Suzy Davies. Delyth Jewell. I am not saying I would vote for them, mind, but they are not as actively dislikeable as many AMs.
I think all 3 leaders are poor, with Adam Price being a particular disappointment.
Also, as IIRC @ydoethur pointed out, no time limit is given. And Dundee Council has changed control quite a lot in the last decade. It was Labour pre-2012 IIRC.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Yes, I think my analogy was a cruise ship with 400 over-60s capsizing and drowning them all - not just one day, but every day. Just imagine 400 a day dead in an accident, or via terrorism; nobody would shrug their shoulders and say, "well, that's life, and most of them were old anyway". So the lethality is not in doubt. I do agree with you though - it's not whether something should be done, it's whether we are doing the right thing. In respect of which, I do have severe doubts about the Xmas policy, such as it is. Sure people will break the rules, but government advice should be trying to minimise, not enable, extended family indoor contact.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Not to mention the argument that Covid-19 victims would have died in a few months anyway is a defence not even Dr Shipman's lawyer would have used.
It seems a very odd argument. If the average age of death was, say, 87 then if I reached my 87th birthday I'd nevertheless have a lot more expecxtancy than 364 days simply because that average includes the folk who died at a younger age. (And thgat doesn't take into account increasing life expectancy).
'Should they have settled on Biden already? Yes. Are they doing anything nefarious by waiting? No. It shouldn't make much difference to those who think Biden is a certainty anyway.'
Nefarious wouldn't be my word. Incompetent, yes. But it does make a difference and not just to the rather abstract bond of trust that exists between backer and layer.
I am maxed out on Biden. I would like to free up that cash for other projects, but I cannot until Betfair settle. I could cash out of course, but that would be to accept a value on the bet way below what I think it is worth, so I am waiting, impatiently. I had a perfectly reasonable expectation that the matter would be settled by now. It hasn't because Betfair are not sticking to the rules. They have changed them, mid-event, without explanation.
Yes, I think Biden is a certainty, or as near as you will ever get to one in the affairs of men, but as a prudent punter I keep asking myself if there is any way the bet could not come in. I can't think of one, but I have to countenenace the unexpected. Maybe Betfair really are going broke. Maybe they plan to change the rules again and void all the bets. Maybe they have their own idiosynchratic interpretion of the phrase 'most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election' which they have not yet revealed.
Maybe I'm just fed up with keep checking and checking to see if anything really has happened to throw the result in doubt.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Not to mention the argument that Covid-19 victims would have died in a few months anyway is a defence not even Dr Shipman's lawyer would have used.
How many people are dying because they're not having their treatment for other illnesses, or haven't been diagnosed because they haven't been out of their house for ages?
What's the point? The attackers are probably poor parents (this is not a reflection on people in Dundee or Scotland as a whole, more on the kind of people who attack teachers, they have nothing to lose from doing so) or kids. So you spend a fortune in court with nothing to show for it.
Criminal acts could lead to custodial sentences.Why would the police not prosecute?
I note there was some interesting discussion this morning on classic British cars of the 196070/s. Two of my favourite drives were the Alvis TE21 and the Rover P5B Coupe.
Both somewhat rakish and not at all like Mrs Jack W's husband at all ....
What's the point? The attackers are probably poor parents (this is not a reflection on people in Dundee or Scotland as a whole, more on the kind of people who attack teachers, they have nothing to lose from doing so) or kids. So you spend a fortune in court with nothing to show for it.
Criminal acts could lead to custodial sentences.Why would the police not prosecute?
Because in general, things that happen in school are seen, rightly or wrongly, as disciplinary matters for the school unless they cause significant injury.
It is also surprisingly difficult to get evidence if they don’t as the children who were there will almost always either refuse to say what happened to the police or actively lie to support their classmate.
That's how it should be and I think it will inspire confidence in many. I maintain it's a logistically complex process given those involved but nothing that can't be resolved with adequate planning and co-ordination.
The logistics of the temperature-controlled vaccines especially are going to be a nightmare, but there's a lot of planning going into the distribution.
The production has already been scaled-up by the manufacturers, underwritten by governments so millions of doses will be available immediately on approval - there will be nurses with vaccines in care homes within hours.
The problem is they'll have to come back three weeks later to do the second dose so they need to do "everyone" in a particular tranche or cohort (very grown up words) within a 3-week window before they repeat the whole process.
Yes, the logistics are going to go in waves, with the second dose for the first tranche underway as the first doses go to the second tranche in the same area.
I don't think this is going to be that big a deal.
There will be distribution centres. They will have freezers. Once the vaccine is removed from its dry ice packaging, then it can be stored in a regular refreigerator or freezer for five days.
But that's largely irrelevant as there won't be vaccines lying around: they'll open four or five packages from Pfizer every day in large cities. The issue will be getting enough made, not the fact that they are slightly awkward to deal with.
Is anybody keeping a count of the number of Tory MPs who support the government's rules except when they are applied to their own constituency?
I have done a big spreadsheet and the percentage matches the percentage of the broader population who support any and all lockdown restrictions - as long as they themselves can do what they think best.
'Should they have settled on Biden already? Yes. Are they doing anything nefarious by waiting? No. It shouldn't make much difference to those who think Biden is a certainty anyway.'
Nefarious wouldn't be my word. Incompetent, yes. But it does make a difference and not just to the rather abstract bond of trust that exists between backer and layer.
I am maxed out on Biden. I would like to free up that cash for other projects, but I cannot until Betfair settle. I could cash out of course, but that would be to accept a value on the bet way below what I think it is worth, so I am waiting, impatiently. I had a perfectly reasonable expectation that the matter would be settled by now. It hasn't because Betfair are not sticking to the rules. They have changed them, mid-event, without explanation.
Yes, I think Biden is a certainty, or as near as you will ever get to one in the affairs of men, but as a prudent punter I keep asking myself if there is any way the bet could not come in. I can't think of one, but I have to countenenace the unexpected. Maybe Betfair really are going broke. Maybe they plan to change the rules again and void all the bets. Maybe they have their own idiosynchratic interpretion of the phrase 'most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election' which they have not yet revealed.
Maybe I'm just fed up with keep checking and checking to see if anything really has happened to throw the result in doubt.
So yes, it does make a difference.
I agree its borderline incompetence but over the last few years well over half the companies I have dealt with have demonstrated regular incompetence, it is just the way of the modern world. Processes have been automated, experts marginalised, managers over promoted and companies focused too much on the short term. Sadly we should all build in an expectation of incompetence into life. The modern systems do work wonderfully when everything is going smoothly but regularly struggle with the slightest complexity.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
If I were being cynical, I'd say those putting wealth before health were more afraid that any economic consequences would be profoundly negative for the Conservatives and might lead to their replacement in Government by Labour.
If the cost of preventing Labour getting into Government was to be the deaths of a few hundred "sick oldies" or "obese slobs" (as someone on here described them), it would be a price well worth paying.
For some, the nightmare is not a virus running wild through the population but the Labour Party in Government.
That of course would be absurdly cynical though, wouldn't it?
That is cynical....... But there's no doubt that the anti-lockdown, put the economy first brigade are almost exclusively from the right wing (although I know most right wingers on here do take the health crisis seriously - indeed, I think me and bluest of the blue are usually on the same page on this, if on nothing else). For once, though, the left do seem more united. I'm not aware of any vocal anti-restriction Labour MPs, for example - there may be a few, but if there are they're keeping quiet.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Ordinary people are completely stupid idiots who cannot be trusted to make the simplest decisions. They should only be allowed out when they have been fully vaccinated and then only with supervision.
Its quite clear that Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere.
Why? What's their motive? Is there some QAnon type conspiracy I'm missing here? What's in it for them?
One life lost is one too many for a lot of these people, their remit is to save lives, not consider the cost of what they are doing.
If you take @contrarian's statement at face value - that "Whitty and Vallance want total lockdown, for ever, everywhere" - then you have to assume there's some conspiracy at work.
SAGE (and me and most other people, I suspect) will have been surprised by how quickly the virus took off again, and how quickly the hospitals filled.
I think we all missed what a big factor the arrival of winter, and everybody being forced indoors, would have on transmission rates. I think we all also assumed that the measures to shield older people would be more effective, and that a lot of this would burn through younger cohorts quickly.
We were wrong. The fact that even Sweden and the most liberatarian of US states are imposing pretty serious measures tells us that we have a few more months of unpleasantness ahead of us.
But we also have two and a half working vaccines. It's highly likely we'll see more vaccine good news from J&J and Novavax in the next couple of weeks. And the first people in the UK will get the vaccine next week. By the end of the year, I'd expect most NHS front line staff to have been vaccinated.
At the beginning of next year the days start to lengthen again. More and more people will have been vaccinated.
Now, Whitty and Valance may be overly cautious. But they also want to avoid disaster - which is when hospitals lack the capacity to treat the sick. Because when that happens, that IFR isn't going to be 0.2% or 1% - it'll be 3-4%.
Thank you, yes I was doing as you say.
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
Somebody put it rather well when they pointed out the fatality rate in the UK is the equivalent of a jumbo jet crashing everyday.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
Not to mention the argument that Covid-19 victims would have died in a few months anyway is a defence not even Dr Shipman's lawyer would have used.
I am absolutely astonished at the crass, incredible callousness of Graham Brady and the "fuck lockdown" brigade. We have two superb vaccines and one good to superb vaccine. A few months more of government spending and keeping the heid stops the jumbo jets from crashing. Then we can drink all we want.
The noose tightens, getting ever closer to the centre.
Don't think people fully (or even partly) appreciate the sheer blinding fury of Alex Salmond at what happened to him He has been turned into a pariah, his reputation trashed - and that doesn't take account of the excruciating experience of the criminal trial. (NB - The premise of the Kirsty Wark BBC documentary was obviously premised on him going down.) Few would forgive those who they felt were responsible and I don't think Eck is a forgiving kind.
I think this has the potential, when we look back at it, to make "I Claudius" read like a kindergarten fairy tale.
Isn’t there an episode where Claudius shags an underage girl?
Because I don’t think anyone has accused Salmond of that?
Alec Salmond has not denied sleeping with an underage girl.
Comments
I'm a big Ed Miliband fan, I hope he gets back into government at some point.
Case numbers are recorded higher but that's just because they were getting missed first time around.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-55082980
From case data -
From hospital admissions data
Alex got to the eat the figs.
I'm expecting the military in particular to make a big show of their role, with helicopters and boots on the ground getting vaccines quickly to the front line.
I vaguely remember some statistic about the number of deaths in the (relatively) very young with no pre-existing conditions, under 40s or something, and it was extremely small suggesting that mortality in the young is heavily skewed by pre-existing conditions, but I don't know if the most relevant conditions have been identified. Foxy may know more about this, since he's a clinician.
Such knowledge would be very helpful in the design of the vaccination schedule, of course! The government rules on who counts as "vulnerable" for flu vaccines seems to change from year to year. Some years I am invited because of a neurological condition, some years not. This year I was invited for a flu jab (though in fact I had already been given one by my employer) and then a few weeks later got a letter saying that the invite had been made in error on the grounds that I'd had glandular fever 25 years ago, and rescinding the offer!
--AS
The production has already been scaled-up by the manufacturers, underwritten by governments so millions of doses will be available immediately on approval - there will be nurses with vaccines in care homes within hours.
Yes, I'm slightly peeved but there has to be a boundary somewhere. The issue is the two Isles of Sheppy and Thanet where, as anyone who has been there will tell you, the poverty is shocking (esp in the former). I'm more pissed off about the gridlock that Mr Farage's antics half a decade ago will bring about in a few weeks.
So you, not being insane, are not really angry.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/144838d0-6be6-4fdb-a919-0a38811741c3
I just find some of the comments on here incredulous. The human misery being caused globally by this virus, including around 400 each day dying from it in the UK over the last few weeks, is unarguable. Those who try to write it off as something that only affects people who are "nearly dead anyway", not much worse than the flu, and something that shouldn't stop us getting on with our normal business are to me, bonkers. Only a fool would think that everybody doing as they please wouldn't results in thousands of extra deaths. The bonkers lot include just a few on here, some scientists/statisticians/medics, the Toby Young/Peter Hitchens types, and a small but significant number of Tory MPs who oppose strict measures because although they may save a few (old) lives they damage the economy. Bonkers, the lot of them. You can argue a bit about the data, but the big picture death toll here and elsewhere is a matter of fact except at the margins.
Sorry, rant over.
If planes crash regularly, they are grounded. Just ask Boeing.
So the suggestion we should do nothing while a dangerous virus goes on the rampage is ludicrous.
Whether we are doing the right things is an altogether different question.
The leader of the fourth largest group in the Senedd at the last elections is Neil Fucking Hamilton, FFS (although he’s the only member left).
Their leadership poll had Long-Bailey winning, so Starmer's result here isn't quite so shocking as it looks.
Milliband is popular because he took over when Starmer wasn't around recently and the left left made a big thing of how well he did. It gave a lot of people who are anti-Starmer a chance to mock Boris, which they normally aren't allowed to do when it's normal PMQs (because Starmer is the bigger enemy).
https://twitter.com/timothy_stanley/status/1332040479484104704?s=20
https://twitter.com/timothy_stanley/status/1332041054665777152?s=20
I should point out my parents live in Tunbridge Wells and my future parents in law near Thanet, the county has been divided too long
https://www.ukip.org/welsh-assembly-members
They have all gone ... apart from Neil Fucking.
Even Mark Fucking has gone to join the Abolish the Assembly Party.
But let's go back a step -- shrewd players with millions in the bank have many larger markets to exploit. A 1.01 Biden sure thing is great if it pays out tomorrow. 1% over two months is less attractive weighed against the stock market or similar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_Senedd_election
One point to remember is that with their votes disappearing, the Conservatives should be able to make gains.
The real question is, will Labour suffer significant losses?
It is like Charlie Brown and the football.
When I used to visit the track regularly, bookmakers were pretty careful not to take bets once the race had started. I never heard of one taking a bet after the result had been announced, never mind weeks later. I doubt it would be legal.
If the cost of preventing Labour getting into Government was to be the deaths of a few hundred "sick oldies" or "obese slobs" (as someone on here described them), it would be a price well worth paying.
For some, the nightmare is not a virus running wild through the population but the Labour Party in Government.
That of course would be absurdly cynical though, wouldn't it?
What a f*ing mess Johnson has made of this again.
It is better than the Tripartite Indenture !!
https://lettersofnote.com/2009/10/28/we-all-feel-like-that-now-and-then/
I have a reasonably high opinion of Eluned Morgan, Suzy Davies. Delyth Jewell. I am not saying I would vote for them, mind, but they are not as actively dislikeable as many AMs.
I think all 3 leaders are poor, with Adam Price being a particular disappointment.
https://twitter.com/mark_mclaughlin/status/1332041592732049409?s=20
So the lethality is not in doubt. I do agree with you though - it's not whether something should be done, it's whether we are doing the right thing.
In respect of which, I do have severe doubts about the Xmas policy, such as it is. Sure people will break the rules, but government advice should be trying to minimise, not enable, extended family indoor contact.
'Should they have settled on Biden already? Yes. Are they doing anything nefarious by waiting? No. It shouldn't make much difference to those who think Biden is a certainty anyway.'
Nefarious wouldn't be my word. Incompetent, yes. But it does make a difference and not just to the rather abstract bond of trust that exists between backer and layer.
I am maxed out on Biden. I would like to free up that cash for other projects, but I cannot until Betfair settle. I could cash out of course, but that would be to accept a value on the bet way below what I think it is worth, so I am waiting, impatiently. I had a perfectly reasonable expectation that the matter would be settled by now. It hasn't because Betfair are not sticking to the rules. They have changed them, mid-event, without explanation.
Yes, I think Biden is a certainty, or as near as you will ever get to one in the affairs of men, but as a prudent punter I keep asking myself if there is any way the bet could not come in. I can't think of one, but I have to countenenace the unexpected. Maybe Betfair really are going broke. Maybe they plan to change the rules again and void all the bets. Maybe they have their own idiosynchratic interpretion of the phrase 'most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election' which they have not yet revealed.
Maybe I'm just fed up with keep checking and checking to see if anything really has happened to throw the result in doubt.
So yes, it does make a difference.
Both somewhat rakish and not at all like Mrs Jack W's husband at all ....
It is also surprisingly difficult to get evidence if they don’t as the children who were there will almost always either refuse to say what happened to the police or actively lie to support their classmate.
There will be distribution centres. They will have freezers. Once the vaccine is removed from its dry ice packaging, then it can be stored in a regular refreigerator or freezer for five days.
But that's largely irrelevant as there won't be vaccines lying around: they'll open four or five packages from Pfizer every day in large cities. The issue will be getting enough made, not the fact that they are slightly awkward to deal with.
For once, though, the left do seem more united. I'm not aware of any vocal anti-restriction Labour MPs, for example - there may be a few, but if there are they're keeping quiet.
https://twitter.com/NeilDotObrien/status/1330830800850472961