FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
If you looked at the charts presented at the time, you would have seen that the "surge capacity" was only just above the expected peak in cases. There is zero chance the nightingales would have been sufficient for unrestricted spread of the disease. It wasn't about building capacity so restrictions could be lifted, it was building capacity because even with restrictions it was looking perilously close.
So the answer is 'yes, the original premise of lockdown was a giant lie'. The NHS has clearly built zero capacity, even though it has had months of lockdown to do that.
Hopefully 60m more people will take the hint and not travel.
There’s vaccines coming, we’ll be back to something approaching normal soon, don’t throw it away now...
Are you seriously suggesting that because HMQ is staying at only one of her 24 homes everyone should feel likewise motivated not to see their families?
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
If you looked at the charts presented at the time, you would have seen that the "surge capacity" was only just above the expected peak in cases. There is zero chance the nightingales would have been sufficient for unrestricted spread of the disease. It wasn't about building capacity so restrictions could be lifted, it was building capacity because even with restrictions it was looking perilously close.
So the answer is 'yes, the original premise of lockdown was a giant lie'. The NHS has clearly built zero capacity, even though it has had months of lockdown to do that.
The original premise of lockdown was to flatten the sombrero.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Frankly even as it is I don't know how you can vote for it as they are far too authoritarian. Yes the alternative is labour currentlly but we really need a none of the above option to make all the parties think and get their act together
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
If you looked at the charts presented at the time, you would have seen that the "surge capacity" was only just above the expected peak in cases. There is zero chance the nightingales would have been sufficient for unrestricted spread of the disease. It wasn't about building capacity so restrictions could be lifted, it was building capacity because even with restrictions it was looking perilously close.
So the answer is 'yes, the original premise of lockdown was a giant lie'. The NHS has clearly built zero capacity, even though it has had months of lockdown to do that.
You are assuming the government has perfect foresight.
It doesn't.
But it knows that if it calls it wrong, then you end up with the situation in Northern Italy in March or New York in April, when the hospitals are overflowing, there are more bodies than the morgues can process, and the health service has broken down.
You are also creating a false dichotomy.
Because in this circumstance, the economy is not saved, because irrespective of government diktat, everything shuts anyway. If people are scared, they don't go out.
Under the Scotland Act 1998, the Scottish Parliament is not allowed to pass legislation relating to matters “reserved” to Westminster, including “the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England”. This is widely interpreted to mean that any referendum relating to Scottish independence would require Westminster approval. However, the matter has never been tested in court, so there remains some uncertainty about whether Holyrood could hold an advisory referendum without consent.
So says the Institute for Government last week
Not going anywhere concrete. Any dispute over a referendum would lead to mass unionist boycott. Sturgeon herself has, I believe, said that a Section 30 order would be necessary. This is really just about the optics, like most everything else to do with SNP Govt.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
If you looked at the charts presented at the time, you would have seen that the "surge capacity" was only just above the expected peak in cases. There is zero chance the nightingales would have been sufficient for unrestricted spread of the disease. It wasn't about building capacity so restrictions could be lifted, it was building capacity because even with restrictions it was looking perilously close.
So the answer is 'yes, the original premise of lockdown was a giant lie'. The NHS has clearly built zero capacity, even though it has had months of lockdown to do that.
Did anyone say the purpose was to have them so there could be unrestricted transmission of the virus? And that last statement is demonstrably false. You can go and see them for yourself if you want.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
Just skimmed PT and was pleased to see that according to you we are holding a pair of "pocket aces" in our negotiations with Brussels. A genuine spirit lifter. So much so that I'll be skipping my usual this evening.
Absolutely we do. On both fish and LPF the default no deal position is that we get exactly what we want. Ace for the UK on both of those.
Pocket Aces.
But then what? Seriously. Suppose we play those Pocket Aces?
Your view is that No Deal will be fine, so you'll be happy to do so.
Others- like The Bank Of England- think the economic consequences of No Deal would be horrible. "Worse than Covid" they said last week.
So can we really play those cards? It might win this hand, but the win might be utterly Pyrric.
In isolation, I can see the temptation. But only if you put the consequences in a massive Somebody Else's Problem field.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
Did you not read the various articles from March / April enumerating what had been done to increase capacity, and how much it had increased, by stopping other services and various other measures?
IMO if it trends towards capacity (not likely - a few days ago when I checked COVID inpatients were still 20% below the April peak and starting to trend downwards) the concern will be around having to close other services which have ramped up again now.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
You do talk tosh. The Nightingales were fitted out with beds all with respirators in case the worse happened and we had a mass of covid patients needing them. The staff would have come from existing hospitals plus any that could have been brought back into service from outside. In my wife's firm all the medics including her volunteered and the business had a plan to release them if necessary.
But even still both existing hospitals and the Nightingales would have been on emergency staffing.
That is not the same as just doubling the NHS overnight.
So the original idea of lockdown, to increase NHS capacity to cater for COVID must have been a giant lie then? you seem to be arguing its impossible to increase capacity.
Sigh. I give up. No one more go.
Lockdown was to stop growth of cases or moderate that growth and it gave us time to increase capacity of the NHS.
Yes it is possible to increase capacity of the NHS but it takes time. Beds and respirators which would have taken months were achieved in week, but doctors and nurses take years and there is nothing you can do about that.
Except you can bring back into service those that have left, spread resources thinner and reschedule. Eg cut back on operations and move anesthetists into ICU, move those about to qualify into action and those coming in from outside and move everyone up a level of responsibility, etc, etc.
But this is all emergency type stuff and not what should be done in a normal running hospital.
OK fine but why tell voters that the lockdown was all about 'building capacity'. It never was. It was about the people of Britain living a lifestyle that ensured the NHS faced the same sort of overall burden it always does.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
What Conservative Party? It has been morphed into Bluekip
Cyclefree, there's a sort of insulation layer of senior management that sits aloof and above these things. What does the archbishop of canterbury know about anything!?
I can think of no better illustration as to how this failure of accountability works than the Libor fixing trials.
I just happened to be called onto jury service as one of these were commencing. I filled in a few forms that said that yes I did know about 10-12 of the defendants, yes I did have substantial expertise in the area, yes I had worked for a couple of the listed firms. Every single one of those things excluded me. (I was really quite happy about that) That's insane though.
When I was working for a certain oil company a new manger was bought in from a competitor, above me.
He was rather startled that senior management actually wanted to know things. Apparently, in his previous role, there was approbation towards those who "officiously informed" senior managers of issues.
Hopefully 60m more people will take the hint and not travel.
There’s vaccines coming, we’ll be back to something approaching normal soon, don’t throw it away now...
Are you seriously suggesting that because HMQ is staying at only one of her 24 homes everyone should feel likewise motivated not to see their families?
Well it does give those that find it a chore another excuse.
Feck, Argyll & Bute hitting the high (low) notes. Went for a walk with a pal on Sunday and he bumped into someone he knew; usual 'gagging for a pint' patter, and the guy said he'd been nipping down to Helensburgh for a bevvy every so often. I'm sure twats like that have played their part.
Cases up to 13,430 from 11,299 last Tuesday though, but that's because the latter number was unexpectedly low, presumably due to an unexplained reporting hiccup.
I wouldn't go by a single day comparison, but there are signs that the rate at which case are falling may be flattening a little. Hopefully not.
As a good Muslim boy I've never eaten a Scotch egg, so have I missed out?
Because it sounds minging'
Delicious served hot (good ones). Don't have to use pork either, beef is fine. Egg, ground meat, breadcrumbs - all the good stuff that life's for.
I've never been able to eat eggs. It's not an allergy (I can eat cake and pretend there is no egg in it) it's more like an aversion bordering on a phobia. I even struggle with Cadbury's Creme. So I'm not going to the pub for the forseeable.
That's a pity - they really are nature's perfect food.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
Just skimmed PT and was pleased to see that according to you we are holding a pair of "pocket aces" in our negotiations with Brussels. A genuine spirit lifter. So much so that I'll be skipping my usual this evening.
Absolutely we do. On both fish and LPF the default no deal position is that we get exactly what we want. Ace for the UK on both of those.
Pocket Aces.
But then what? Seriously. Suppose we play those Pocket Aces?
Your view is that No Deal will be fine, so you'll be happy to do so.
Others- like The Bank Of England- think the economic consequences of No Deal would be horrible. "Worse than Covid" they said last week.
So can we really play those cards? It might win this hand, but the win might be utterly Pyrric.
In isolation, I can see the temptation. But only if you put the consequences in a massive Somebody Else's Problem field.
Yes people might think the flop, turn and river are going to be bad. They may be afraid. They may be burnt before.
Or they may be worried about being short stacked. They might be afraid of going All In.
They could be wrong, they've been wrong before. We'll only know by calling the EU's bluff.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
Well, double the size of the NHS every 5 days or so, anyway. By the time it's run all the way through, we might have had an NHS a hundred times the size. Just by increasing it whenever we needed to.
Cyclefree, there's a sort of insulation layer of senior management that sits aloof and above these things. What does the archbishop of canterbury know about anything!?
I can think of no better illustration as to how this failure of accountability works than the Libor fixing trials.
I just happened to be called onto jury service as one of these were commencing. I filled in a few forms that said that yes I did know about 10-12 of the defendants, yes I did have substantial expertise in the area, yes I had worked for a couple of the listed firms. Every single one of those things excluded me. (I was really quite happy about that) That's insane though.
When I was working for a certain oil company a new manger was bought in from a competitor, above me.
He was rather startled that senior management actually wanted to know things. Apparently, in his previous role, there was approbation towards those who "officiously informed" senior managers of issues.
I have found in most companies that any report I write by the time it gets to really senior management is unregnisable as the report I wrote after its had gloss put on it by intervening management layers. Perhaps thats what he expected
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
You do talk tosh. The Nightingales were fitted out with beds all with respirators in case the worse happened and we had a mass of covid patients needing them. The staff would have come from existing hospitals plus any that could have been brought back into service from outside. In my wife's firm all the medics including her volunteered and the business had a plan to release them if necessary.
But even still both existing hospitals and the Nightingales would have been on emergency staffing.
That is not the same as just doubling the NHS overnight.
So the original idea of lockdown, to increase NHS capacity to cater for COVID must have been a giant lie then? you seem to be arguing its impossible to increase capacity.
Sigh. I give up. No one more go.
Lockdown was to stop growth of cases or moderate that growth and it gave us time to increase capacity of the NHS.
Yes it is possible to increase capacity of the NHS but it takes time. Beds and respirators which would have taken months were achieved in week, but doctors and nurses take years and there is nothing you can do about that.
Except you can bring back into service those that have left, spread resources thinner and reschedule. Eg cut back on operations and move anesthetists into ICU, move those about to qualify into action and those coming in from outside and move everyone up a level of responsibility, etc, etc.
But this is all emergency type stuff and not what should be done in a normal running hospital.
OK fine but why tell voters that the lockdown was all about 'building capacity'. It never was. It was about the people of Britain living a lifestyle that ensured the NHS faced the same sort of overall burden it always does.
Bulding capacity is a lie.
The number of doctors and nurses in the NHS has been fairly static in recent years
The lockdown was never stated to be about building capacity. It was stated to be about reducing the number of cases below the level at which the NHS would max out.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
Did you not read the various articles from March / April enumerating what had been done to increase capacity, and how much it had increased, by stopping other services and various other measures?
IMO if it trends towards capacity (not likely - a few days ago when I checked COVID inpatients were still 20% below the April peak and starting to trend downwards) the concern will be around having to close other services which have ramped up again now.
That is not building capacity though, it it? that is transferring services.
Nobody told the voters in April that treating more covid cases meant other services would effectively grind to a halt.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
You do talk tosh. The Nightingales were fitted out with beds all with respirators in case the worse happened and we had a mass of covid patients needing them. The staff would have come from existing hospitals plus any that could have been brought back into service from outside. In my wife's firm all the medics including her volunteered and the business had a plan to release them if necessary.
But even still both existing hospitals and the Nightingales would have been on emergency staffing.
That is not the same as just doubling the NHS overnight.
So the original idea of lockdown, to increase NHS capacity to cater for COVID must have been a giant lie then? you seem to be arguing its impossible to increase capacity.
Sigh. I give up. No one more go.
Lockdown was to stop growth of cases or moderate that growth and it gave us time to increase capacity of the NHS.
Yes it is possible to increase capacity of the NHS but it takes time. Beds and respirators which would have taken months were achieved in week, but doctors and nurses take years and there is nothing you can do about that.
Except you can bring back into service those that have left, spread resources thinner and reschedule. Eg cut back on operations and move anesthetists into ICU, move those about to qualify into action and those coming in from outside and move everyone up a level of responsibility, etc, etc.
But this is all emergency type stuff and not what should be done in a normal running hospital.
OK fine but why tell voters that the lockdown was all about 'building capacity'. It never was. It was about the people of Britain living a lifestyle that ensured the NHS faced the same sort of overall burden it always does.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Nor mine
I am sure Labour would welcome you both back to the fold
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
If you looked at the charts presented at the time, you would have seen that the "surge capacity" was only just above the expected peak in cases. There is zero chance the nightingales would have been sufficient for unrestricted spread of the disease. It wasn't about building capacity so restrictions could be lifted, it was building capacity because even with restrictions it was looking perilously close.
So the answer is 'yes, the original premise of lockdown was a giant lie'. The NHS has clearly built zero capacity, even though it has had months of lockdown to do that.
You are assuming the government has perfect foresight.
It doesn't.
But it knows that if it calls it wrong, then you end up with the situation in Northern Italy in March or New York in April, when the hospitals are overflowing, there are more bodies than the morgues can process, and the health service has broken down.
You are also creating a false dichotomy.
Because in this circumstance, the economy is not saved, because irrespective of government diktat, everything shuts anyway. If people are scared, they don't go out.
I wonder how long he thinks it takes to train up doctors and nurses from scratch. I mean, we've had months. Isn't that ample time to take someone off the street and make them a qualified doctor?
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
"Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? "
Damn it, why do we spend any money on the army when there aren't any wars? If we need an army we can just click our fingers and generate one in a few seconds. All that materiel, all those trained people, it just requires political will.
Why aren't you in charge, @contrarian? Because we could save a FORTUNE.
So again, I put it to you that the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a completely false premise. There was no way the NHS could have increased capacity that quickly, or in fact at all.
Increasing capacity was used to sell the falsehood that resources were not being diverted from other services to covid in a completely unchanged size health service.
And then when covid subsided, say in the summer, what happened to to those diverted services? they didn;t flow back into other treatments, eh?
No the NHS simply got used to producing much less.
The additional capacity created was the Nightingale Hospitals - temporary facilities that could be used to help with Covid patients.
If growth is exponential, and you're always looking at infections that happened two weeks ago, then it's really hard to call this right.
Say normal hospital capacity is 100 people, and the Nightingales offer an additional 100 units of (Covid specific) capacity.
You ned to lockdown when cases are just 40 because the next two week doublings are already in the bag. If you lockdown when the hospitals are full, then it gets really ugly because there is a quadrupling of demand from that point.
That you’re constantly looking two weeks in the mirror, is what’s the most horrible about this virus, from a healthcare capacity and movement restrictions perspective. A couple of days too late with the restrictions and you've blown through your healthcare capacity.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Frankly even as it is I don't know how you can vote for it as they are far too authoritarian. Yes the alternative is labour currentlly but we really need a none of the above option to make all the parties think and get their act together
None of the above never achieves anything, if you cannot choose one from the Tories, Starmer Labour, Davey's LDs, the Greens or Farage's Party there really are not many other options left
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
Did you not read the various articles from March / April enumerating what had been done to increase capacity, and how much it had increased, by stopping other services and various other measures?
IMO if it trends towards capacity (not likely - a few days ago when I checked COVID inpatients were still 20% below the April peak and starting to trend downwards) the concern will be around having to close other services which have ramped up again now.
That is not building capacity though, it it? that is transferring services.
Nobody told the voters in April that treating more covid cases meant other services would effectively grind to a halt.
Nobody claimed lockdown was about increasing the size of the NHS either.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Nor mine
I am sure Labour would welcome you both back to the fold
Which would usher in a Labour government.
I don't want to see that, you as a BlueCorbyner apparently do.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
''Vaccines macht frei''
Why are you against protecting yourself and others from disease?
because for the vast majority covid isn't life threatening or even serious. And those who want to protect themselves can do so by following all the lockdown rules they want.
many vulnerable people don't want, having surveyed the risks. And that is also their right.
The problem comes when all those normally healthy people bung up the health system.
I read somewhere the government has spent so much money they could have paid for private medical care for every Briton and still have change left over.
It seems the service is still the same, or even may be smaller, than at the outset, despite the original premise of lockdown . To increase capacity.
Which means the original premise of lockdown, to increase capacity, was a complete lie.
The NHS clearly never really wanted to to increase capacity. It wanted to use covid to DECREASE capacity. Which is in effect what it has done. What we have is a winter respiratory service like any other, but with far fewer treatments for other ailments. A drastically reduced NHS output, overall.
And so we have a system where the NHS decides what service it wants to offer, and society is controlled, whether through lockdown or dreadful treatment rationing, in response.
The NHS is in fact controlling everything.
You read somewhere something vague which demonstrates it's all a conspiracy.
Well, thanks for clearing that up.
OK just run the numbers. Why didn;t the government simply leave society to run free and just double the size of the health service over night?? No furlough. No test and trace. Just an enormous health service to cater for the population's increased needs. They could have done this and saved themselves a quarter of trillion pounds overnight.
Why didn;t they? Nightingale hospitals were mothballed instead? Increasing capacity was clearly not what the NHS wanted. They didn;t want to 'make room' for the virus themselves. They wanted the population to make room. And the population have. With catastrophic results.
The NHS is, in fact, British Stalinism made flesh. It should be smashed to smithereens.
Double the size of the NHS overnight. How do you propose to do this?
Don;t ask me ask the government. They sold the population the idea the original lockdown was to boost capacity. It very much looks as if capacity was not increased at all, let alone doubled. Nightingales were mothballed.
Why? because the NHS realised that if NHS capacity was demonstrably increased, people would have less patience with their cancer screening being cancelled for months or their GP being un contactable.
No. Much better to keep capacity the same and simply slash the level of service people are getting. Let the patient take the strain of covid, not the NHS.
You do talk tosh. The Nightingales were fitted out with beds all with respirators in case the worse happened and we had a mass of covid patients needing them. The staff would have come from existing hospitals plus any that could have been brought back into service from outside. In my wife's firm all the medics including her volunteered and the business had a plan to release them if necessary.
But even still both existing hospitals and the Nightingales would have been on emergency staffing.
That is not the same as just doubling the NHS overnight.
So the original idea of lockdown, to increase NHS capacity to cater for COVID must have been a giant lie then? you seem to be arguing its impossible to increase capacity.
Sigh. I give up. No one more go.
Lockdown was to stop growth of cases or moderate that growth and it gave us time to increase capacity of the NHS.
Yes it is possible to increase capacity of the NHS but it takes time. Beds and respirators which would have taken months were achieved in week, but doctors and nurses take years and there is nothing you can do about that.
Except you can bring back into service those that have left, spread resources thinner and reschedule. Eg cut back on operations and move anesthetists into ICU, move those about to qualify into action and those coming in from outside and move everyone up a level of responsibility, etc, etc.
But this is all emergency type stuff and not what should be done in a normal running hospital.
OK fine but why tell voters that the lockdown was all about 'building capacity'. It never was. It was about the people of Britain living a lifestyle that ensured the NHS faced the same sort of overall burden it always does.
Bulding capacity is a lie.
The number of doctors and nurses in the NHS has been fairly static in recent years
The lockdown was never stated to be about building capacity. It was stated to be about reducing the number of cases below the level at which the NHS would max out.
IF that were true there would have been no need for all those big fat extremely well publicised and much photographed Nightingale hospitals?
Talk about bait and effing switch. What a con job.
The government's strategy is fairly easy to understand. It is literally whack a mole. Oh how we laughed when that was used as an example but that is it.
They want to batter down the incidence and they will do this, clumsily as it turns out, by tiers, lockdowns, what-all else. When it comes down they will re-open to allow what economic activity that can exist to exist. And then they batter down again when naturally incidence rises.
So why that? Well first I think they were/are shit-scared of the virus and to start with they weren't sure what or how it would play out. What if no vaccine? Endless rises and falls. Secondly, it is the line, impossible to draw, between allowing what economic activity can take place, and avoiding the scenes we all saw in Italy six months ago when hospitals were overflowing.
However, and this is where @contrarian is a vital voice in all of this, the government has also monumentally fucked up. In communication, in redress, in targeting, and as @contrarian says, in the NHS. I have spoken with consultants who are seething at the lack of work being done in the "normal" NHS.
Where is the new capacity? Nightingale? Anything else? What about a signing on bonus of £XXXXX to nurses and doctors and related disciplines.
Plus the control. Brady is right. This is an unprecedented restriction on freedom and the country, whether because of furlough, or holding on to nurse, has acquiesced in a quite extraordinary way.
Cyclefree, there's a sort of insulation layer of senior management that sits aloof and above these things. What does the archbishop of canterbury know about anything!?
I can think of no better illustration as to how this failure of accountability works than the Libor fixing trials.
I just happened to be called onto jury service as one of these were commencing. I filled in a few forms that said that yes I did know about 10-12 of the defendants, yes I did have substantial expertise in the area, yes I had worked for a couple of the listed firms. Every single one of those things excluded me. (I was really quite happy about that) That's insane though.
When I was working for a certain oil company a new manger was bought in from a competitor, above me.
He was rather startled that senior management actually wanted to know things. Apparently, in his previous role, there was approbation towards those who "officiously informed" senior managers of issues.
I have found in most companies that any report I write by the time it gets to really senior management is unregnisable as the report I wrote after its had gloss put on it by intervening management layers. Perhaps thats what he expected
No - what he was talking about is worse than that. Senior management wanted to be able to say "I didn't know".
To such scum, sending them an email is an attack - they either have to *do* something or are now liable for the situation.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Nor mine
I am sure Labour would welcome you both back to the fold
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Frankly even as it is I don't know how you can vote for it as they are far too authoritarian. Yes the alternative is labour currentlly but we really need a none of the above option to make all the parties think and get their act together
None of the above never achieves anything, if you cannot choose one from the Tories, Starmer Labour, Davey's LDs, the Greens or Farage's Party there really are not many other options left
If enough of vote none of the above yes it does, the civil service can tick along quite nicely and most new legislation can wait till a proper government can be elected. Belgium has shown us a few years with no government is not an issue. In the meantime the parties can piss off and work out how to actually offer something people want. None of the parties you mention are worth a damn they are all equally shitty
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019.
Unless you have voted Tory in every election in your life, know all 17 verses of Rule Britannia off by heart and have had Winston Churchill tattooed on your left buttock, you aren't a real Tory.
Au contraire. By the standards set down here this afternoon, Winston Churchill falls head and shoulders short of the requirements.
Indeed Thatcher or Disraeli would be more appropriate, Churchill was even a Liberal MP for a period, great man though he was
It may be rather disturbing, but surely IDS would be the perfect tattoo for the perfect Tory.
I can think of a couple of PBers who might have this already, with a matching orange one to come..
There's that Tory clown from Doncaster with "Moggmentum" tattooed on his chest.
Feck, Argyll & Bute hitting the high (low) notes. Went for a walk with a pal on Sunday and he bumped into someone he knew; usual 'gagging for a pint' patter, and the guy said he'd been nipping down to Helensburgh for a bevvy every so often. I'm sure twats like that have played their part.
Always check the actual case numbers and the scaled numbers. Basically Argyll & Bute has a handful of cases - but a small population.
Cyclefree, there's a sort of insulation layer of senior management that sits aloof and above these things. What does the archbishop of canterbury know about anything!?
I can think of no better illustration as to how this failure of accountability works than the Libor fixing trials.
I just happened to be called onto jury service as one of these were commencing. I filled in a few forms that said that yes I did know about 10-12 of the defendants, yes I did have substantial expertise in the area, yes I had worked for a couple of the listed firms. Every single one of those things excluded me. (I was really quite happy about that) That's insane though.
When I was working for a certain oil company a new manger was bought in from a competitor, above me.
He was rather startled that senior management actually wanted to know things. Apparently, in his previous role, there was approbation towards those who "officiously informed" senior managers of issues.
Oh, that sort of company. Where everyone’s constantly afraid that *they* are the ‘insulation layer’ - the ones who’ll end up in serious trouble at the enquiry, when everyone above plausibly denies knowledge of the f***up.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
They've not even been approved yet....
True, but will be this week, and injecting next... (I believe)
Au contraire. By the standards set down here this afternoon, Winston Churchill falls head and shoulders short of the requirements.
Indeed Thatcher or Disraeli would be more appropriate, Churchill was even a Liberal MP for a period, great man though he was
I did wonder what reaction I would get to Churchill and here it is: Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer for 5 years. Tory leader for 15 years. Tory Prime Minister for 9 years.
Not a proper Tory according to HYUFD. He *might* have achieved more in your party than you have. Just possibly.
He did 'shoot the miners' though. According to popular S Wales myth.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
What's difficult to understand is that the vaccines are now with us and yet the lockdowns are set to last for another six months. At least. And then may be re-imposed in the autumn of 2021.
The light at the end of the tunnel only ever gets further away, in real terms.
I don't see how. If anything the light at the tunnel is nearer now than ever. Six months ago there was talk that a vaccine might never be able to end this fully as it may only be as effective as a flu vaccine. Now we have a vaccine days away from roll out that is far more effective than any flu vaccine and more in the pipeline. That's definite movement in the right direction.
Quite. To wilfully ignore that is crackers. Contrarian is so enmeshed in his magic fantasy land that even this sack of ferrets in a bag looks like an “echo chamber”.
How many PBers both voted Tory in 2019 and voted Leave in 2016? I suspect only a small minority now but 43% of UK voters voted for the former last year and 52% for the latter in 2016 so Contrarian has a point
I did, you did not. Despite your insistence that my views should be disregarded by the Tories.
Worth remembering that in 2019 there were two national elections and the Tories got less than 9% in one of them. I was in the 43% and 52% like most Tories but also like most Tories I was not in the 9%.
Of those three votes HYUFD I was with the majority of Tories on all them. You were against the majority of Tories twice.
I voted Tory last year and in 2001 unlike you.
However I have never denied you are a Leave voter who split their vote between the Brexit party last May and the Tories last December, on Brexit at least you are very much in the minority on here, even more so than me
Yes you lost the 2001 election as well as losing the Referendum and losing the European Parliament election.
Your vision of the party is a party that loses elections and secures less than 9% of the vote nationwide. Good job.
I have voted for the party more times when it has won than it has lost but I am a loyal supporter not a libertarian swing voter who is not a real Tory like you and has voted for Farage and Blair in the past.
You are about as committed a Tory as a Manchester United supporter living in Kensington
And both Philip and I are why the conservative party gets elected more often than not, and not because of your narrow minded prejeudices
How dare you two vote for the Conservative Party! It doesn't want votes from the likes of you, only from real Tories.
Don't worry, if the Tory Party reflected HYUFD it would not get my vote.
It would also not win elections thankfully.
Frankly even as it is I don't know how you can vote for it as they are far too authoritarian. Yes the alternative is labour currentlly but we really need a none of the above option to make all the parties think and get their act together
None of the above never achieves anything, if you cannot choose one from the Tories, Starmer Labour, Davey's LDs, the Greens or Farage's Party there really are not many other options left
If enough of vote none of the above yes it does, the civil service can tick along quite nicely and most new legislation can wait till a proper government can be elected. Belgium has shown us a few years with no government is not an issue. In the meantime the parties can piss off and work out how to actually offer something people want. None of the parties you mention are worth a damn they are all equally shitty
Belgium has PR, under UK FPTP 1 party would likely get a majority even if only 3 voters voted in every constituency
Except we have strengthened the tiers, and have to give it them time to see how it works. It looked like the tougher tier 3 was working, tiers 1 and 2 not so much. Now no-one (aside of Cornwall and the IoW) are in tier 1, there is more of a chance of at least just a slow rise. And the vaccines will be going into arms (probably from Monday).
Cases up to 13,430 from 11,299 last Tuesday though, but that's because the latter number was unexpectedly low, presumably due to an unexplained reporting hiccup.
I wouldn't go by a single day comparison, but there are signs that the rate at which case are falling may be flattening a little. Hopefully not.
Yep, single day comparison to the same day last week is more useful than to the day before, but still very much susceptible to reporting noise like that.
Seven-day reporting average down from 192 to 158 per week per 100,000. Peak was 265 two weeks ago.
FFS. Steve Baker and Des Swayne now inventing "vaccinationism". Apparently, the government should forbid businesses and airlines from insisting on vaccination. Apparently, if they don't they will be "the most authoritarian government since the Commonwealth." Can anyone spot the logic fail? The Tories were the Party who tried to avoid legislating on businesses once.
What is it with these "lockdown sceptics" who just happen to be antivaxxers?
I hate lockdowns, they are illiberal. I look forward to a vaccine so that lockdowns don't happen anymore.
Yes. The quickest way to end the lockdown. And ensure there won't be the threat of another, is, of course, get everyone vaccinated ASAP. This simple fact is too difficult for some.
It probably won't be necessary for everyone to be vaccinated.
Comments
By case data
By hospitalisation data
It doesn't.
But it knows that if it calls it wrong, then you end up with the situation in Northern Italy in March or New York in April, when the hospitals are overflowing, there are more bodies than the morgues can process, and the health service has broken down.
You are also creating a false dichotomy.
Because in this circumstance, the economy is not saved, because irrespective of government diktat, everything shuts anyway. If people are scared, they don't go out.
None in NW or NE region.
Yippee!
Seriously.
Suppose we play those Pocket Aces?
Your view is that No Deal will be fine, so you'll be happy to do so.
Others- like The Bank Of England- think the economic consequences of No Deal would be horrible. "Worse than Covid" they said last week.
So can we really play those cards? It might win this hand, but the win might be utterly Pyrric.
In isolation, I can see the temptation. But only if you put the consequences in a massive Somebody Else's Problem field.
IMO if it trends towards capacity (not likely - a few days ago when I checked COVID inpatients were still 20% below the April peak and starting to trend downwards) the concern will be around having to close other services which have ramped up again now.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1333814151064547329
Bulding capacity is a lie.
He was rather startled that senior management actually wanted to know things. Apparently, in his previous role, there was approbation towards those who "officiously informed" senior managers of issues.
Or they may be worried about being short stacked. They might be afraid of going All In.
They could be wrong, they've been wrong before. We'll only know by calling the EU's bluff.
By the time it's run all the way through, we might have had an NHS a hundred times the size. Just by increasing it whenever we needed to.
The lockdown was never stated to be about building capacity. It was stated to be about reducing the number of cases below the level at which the NHS would max out.
Nobody told the voters in April that treating more covid cases meant other services would effectively grind to a halt.
Intrepidly RCS investigates....
'My God - It's full of Malmesbury!'
(Malmesbury's posts are brilliant. In some future PB space though the ability to be both HUGE and small might be a good idea.)
I mean, we've had months. Isn't that ample time to take someone off the street and make them a qualified doctor?
https://www.oldwindsorclub.uk/
I don't want to see that, you as a BlueCorbyner apparently do.
Talk about bait and effing switch. What a con job.
They want to batter down the incidence and they will do this, clumsily as it turns out, by tiers, lockdowns, what-all else. When it comes down they will re-open to allow what economic activity that can exist to exist. And then they batter down again when naturally incidence rises.
So why that? Well first I think they were/are shit-scared of the virus and to start with they weren't sure what or how it would play out. What if no vaccine? Endless rises and falls. Secondly, it is the line, impossible to draw, between allowing what economic activity can take place, and avoiding the scenes we all saw in Italy six months ago when hospitals were overflowing.
However, and this is where @contrarian is a vital voice in all of this, the government has also monumentally fucked up. In communication, in redress, in targeting, and as @contrarian says, in the NHS. I have spoken with consultants who are seething at the lack of work being done in the "normal" NHS.
Where is the new capacity? Nightingale? Anything else? What about a signing on bonus of £XXXXX to nurses and doctors and related disciplines.
Plus the control. Brady is right. This is an unprecedented restriction on freedom and the country, whether because of furlough, or holding on to nurse, has acquiesced in a quite extraordinary way.
And, not least on PB.
To such scum, sending them an email is an attack - they either have to *do* something or are now liable for the situation.
I tried the thumbnail route - but then had people emailing me to ask why the pictures were unreadably tiny.....
NEW THREAD
Not a proper Tory according to HYUFD. He *might* have achieved more in your party than you have. Just possibly.
He did 'shoot the miners' though. According to popular S Wales myth.
Just something for Mike and the gang to ponder when they consider the vast fund for upgrades that the PB community happily send their way.
(actually @mods there isn't a clear link now)
Seven-day reporting average down from 192 to 158 per week per 100,000. Peak was 265 two weeks ago.