Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Some Definitions – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,693
edited December 2020 in General
imageSome Definitions – politicalbetting.com

“Democracy in Europe” by Larry Siedentop, written when the EU was trying to draft a constitution is, despite its age, worth a read. Surprising as it may seem, given the US’s own current democratic difficulties, the outsider’s analysis of what constitutions mean, how they are arrived at, different views of democracy and how these interact with a Continent’s history, culture and religions is acute. It is one which European and British politicians would have done well to consider before embarking on changes which, arguably, led to Brexit and certainly resulted in one of the biggest popular rejections in the Dutch and French votes on the constitution.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    Primus inter pares.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,363
    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:
    I'm certain the White House has already achieved herd immunity.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,992

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    Arsenal. The future's bright.
    The future is Big Sam.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,897
    The EU is refusing, however unfairly it might seem, to accept the costs and consequences of Britain’s decision to leave. It is seeking to preserve as many of its privileges (eg fishing) and rules as it can. Britain’s government feels that this is an unacceptable refusal to acccept Britain’s sovereignty and freedom of manoeuvre. But it too is seeking to preserve as many of its previous privileges without any of the rules limiting it as it can. Both are cherry-picking

    Yes. It's a negotiation after all. People will disagree on the reasonableness of the cherries to be picked, and the EU is in a strong position to insist on many cherries. The UK crying about unfairness wouldn't really matter even if true. As Mike says 'Powerful entities get more of what they want than less powerful ones'. It's not a matter of one side being more morally correct, high minded or consistent. It's what the sides think they can get out of the other.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,779
    Good evening PBers.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,897

    Primus inter pares.

    But who is primus in our hearts?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130
    kle4 said:

    Primus inter pares.

    But who is primus in our hearts?
    Betty Stove.....
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    I will laugh like a train when Leicester finish above Spurs again...
  • Options
    ClippPClippP Posts: 1,689
    edited December 2020
    First. An excellent piece by OGH. So much so, that I thought it was written by Mrs Cyclefree.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,363
    dixiedean said:

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    Arsenal. The future's bright.
    The future is Big Sam.
    Big Sam.. whatever happened to him.....
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,053
    Foxy said:

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    I will laugh like a train when Leicester finish above Spurs again...
    I suspect that won’t happen. Spurs weren’t great today but still top.

    Lots more to come from Tottenham, I think. Leicester? I’m not so sure - they have already lost four games - suggesting fragility.
  • Options
    Betfair should settle once the Electoral College does its stuff tomorrow.
    Current Betfair prices:-

    Biden 1.02
    Democrats 1.02
    Biden PV 1.02
    Biden PV 49-51.9% 1.03
    Trump PV 46-48.9% 1.02
    Trump ECV 210-239 1.04
    Biden ECV 300-329 1.04
    Biden ECV Hcap -48.5 1.03
    Biden ECV Hcap -63.5 1.03
    Trump ECV Hcap +81.5 no offers

    AZ Dem 1.02
    GA Dem 1.03
    MI Dem 1.02
    NV Dem 1.02
    PA Dem 1.02
    WI Dem 1.02

    Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.04
    Trump exit date 2021 1.05
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Betfair should settle once the Electoral College does its stuff tomorrow.
    Current Betfair prices:-

    Biden 1.02
    Democrats 1.02
    Biden PV 1.02
    Biden PV 49-51.9% 1.03
    Trump PV 46-48.9% 1.02
    Trump ECV 210-239 1.04
    Biden ECV 300-329 1.04
    Biden ECV Hcap -48.5 1.03
    Biden ECV Hcap -63.5 1.03
    Trump ECV Hcap +81.5 no offers

    AZ Dem 1.02
    GA Dem 1.03
    MI Dem 1.02
    NV Dem 1.02
    PA Dem 1.02
    WI Dem 1.02

    Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.04
    Trump exit date 2021 1.05

    Annualised returns of 1500% odd available. Still can't be arsed though.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    Scott_xP said:
    Given how polarised the US, that will.probably have a load of people saying I am not having the one Trump got.

    I would hope Biden and his incoming team will be getting it at the same time.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,892
    edited December 2020
    dr_spyn said:
    I recently discovered he taught at my school though not at the time I went there. He wrote an interesting pamphlet on his time there
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
    Has someone overlooked Mark Drakeford in this round robin letter from The Labour Party to The PM?

    https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1338232587748315136/photo/2
  • Options
    Torygrapgh saying 250k to have had the vaccine by the end of the week, Hancock over-promising again and saying millions before Christmas.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    Scott_xP said:
    I'm certain the White House has already achieved herd immunity.
    But perhaps not Trump. He was given an antibody cocktail, which might have killed off the virus before his adaptive immune response kicked in. He may not have created memory T-cells to COVID, and so may not have immunity, even though he has had the disease.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,658
    Foxy said:

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    I will laugh like a train when Leicester finish above Spurs again...
    Isn't it 'a drain', not that that makes any more sense.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,176
    Roger said:

    dr_spyn said:
    I recently discovered he went to my school though obviously not at the same time!
    He wasn't happy there.

  • Options
    This being a political betting site, the word we really need a definition of is "projected" :)
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
    Roger said:

    dr_spyn said:
    I recently discovered he went to my school though obviously not at the same time!
    Jo Swinson has something similar in common with me.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130

    Torygrapgh saying 250k to have had the vaccine by the end of the week, Hancock over-promising again and saying millions before Christmas.

    To be fair, he said year end.

    Which is the limit of my festive spirit towards him.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130
    dr_spyn said:
    No longer a smiley face.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,720
    Another excellent thread header @Cyclefree, many thanks.

    Let's hope a good many MPs and journalists read it and learn.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020

    Torygrapgh saying 250k to have had the vaccine by the end of the week, Hancock over-promising again and saying millions before Christmas.

    To be fair, he said year end.

    Which is the limit of my festive spirit towards him.
    Well front page is wrong then, but when 3 weeks time, millions (plural), they would have to be running these clinics with opening hours like Primark and where is all the supply going to come from?

    If they do 200k a week, would be decent going. And much better for him to underpromise and say hope to get 500k done by Christmas and if they do get a million, he can boast about it.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,779
    Very sad news about John le Carré.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,897
    For heaven's sake, if they're already giving the illusion of good news with the Christmas hall pass, just announce a deal ahead of Christmas as well, and we can all figure out it's negatives in the new year.
  • Options
    AlwaysSingingAlwaysSinging Posts: 464
    edited December 2020
    FPT- PT you mentioned that 99% of hospitalizations and deaths are in the vaccine priority groups (i.e. over 50s plus those with disease putting them at serious risk). I believe that for deaths, but I don't think that can be right for hospitalizations. Do you have a source?

    --AS

    PS: not an aggressive question, I'd just like to know. Also I might not reply because I've fallen asleep so thanks in advance!
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,892
    I heard on the radio this morning that the EU are master negotiators. It's what they do. The UK by contrast haven't done it for years and are quite out of their depth.

    It might help to explain why we're flailing around sending gunboats.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,176
    geoffw said:

    Roger said:

    dr_spyn said:
    I recently discovered he went to my school though obviously not at the same time!
    He wasn't happy there.

    Sorry Roger, I commented before your edit to say he taught at the school you attended. I don't imply that that was where he was unhappy.

  • Options
    Proof Prince Andrew misled Emily Maitlis: Duke DID stay at Jeffrey Epstein's New York mansion - and his secret itinerary shows hours of 'private time' - during trip when Virginia Roberts claims he slept with her

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049237/Proof-Prince-Andrew-misled-Emily-Maitlis-Duke-DID-stay-Jeffrey-Epsteins-New-York-mansion.html

    I bet famously unsweaty Andrew is at least feeling a little warm...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    Xhaka must be facing a long ban, surely ?
  • Options
    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?
  • Options
    IshmaelZ said:

    Betfair should settle once the Electoral College does its stuff tomorrow.
    Current Betfair prices:-

    Biden 1.02
    Democrats 1.02
    Biden PV 1.02
    Biden PV 49-51.9% 1.03
    Trump PV 46-48.9% 1.02
    Trump ECV 210-239 1.04
    Biden ECV 300-329 1.04
    Biden ECV Hcap -48.5 1.03
    Biden ECV Hcap -63.5 1.03
    Trump ECV Hcap +81.5 no offers

    AZ Dem 1.02
    GA Dem 1.03
    MI Dem 1.02
    NV Dem 1.02
    PA Dem 1.02
    WI Dem 1.02

    Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.04
    Trump exit date 2021 1.05

    Annualised returns of 1500% odd available. Still can't be arsed though.
    I had a few more quid on Friday. We can see the prices shorten as we approach the winning line but there is still some uncertainty around when precisely (ie what time, not just what day) Betfair will settle, and that will be an important consideration for many.
  • Options

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    Hope so.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313
    I see that the inquiry report into the poor performance of polls during the 2019 Australian election (in which polls pointed to a narrow Labor win but they narrowly lost) has just been published.

    It rules out late swing, shy conservatives, deliberate misleading, and early voting effects, as explanations for the bulk of the error. Its main conclusion is that the likely explanation was unrepresentative and poorly adjusted sampling, and specifically over-representation of more politically engaged and better educated voters, which led to over-stating Labor support. It also suggests (but doesn’t have the evidence to establish) there may have been a degree of herding among the polling companies.

    The (long) full report is here:

    https://3859gp38qzh51h504x6gvv0o-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/files/2020/12/Report-of-the-Inquiry-into-the-Performance-of-the-Opinion-Polls-at-the-2019-Australian-Federal-Election.pdf
  • Options
    YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    Proof Prince Andrew misled Emily Maitlis: Duke DID stay at Jeffrey Epstein's New York mansion - and his secret itinerary shows hours of 'private time' - during trip when Virginia Roberts claims he slept with her

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049237/Proof-Prince-Andrew-misled-Emily-Maitlis-Duke-DID-stay-Jeffrey-Epsteins-New-York-mansion.html

    I bet famously unsweaty Andrew is at least feeling a little warm...

    A new euphemism enters the language, as Andrew only stayed there "to save British taxpayers' money".
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,235

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    It would match the timeline for the Pfizer jab/MHRA approval, although foxy has suggested the data is messy, so maybe not.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
  • Options
    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Well as I said down thread, I don't see how his claim will come true. It is silly over promising again. But if you took it at face value, we don't even have enough Pfizer jabs to do that, let alone actually administratoring them.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,720
    edited December 2020
    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    I bet it is.

    Our GP surgery has plans for a drive through vaccination at a local airfield. They trialled this process for this year's flu vaccine and it was a great success. I am sure most GP surgeries have similar plans ready to roll.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728

    Foxy said:

    Lots of my Spurs mates are very happy with Fulham tonight.. .. and with Arsenal losing to Burnley as a bonus fir hhem... Fulham are in the bottom 3.. again... Funny old game innit.

    I will laugh like a train when Leicester finish above Spurs again...
    I suspect that won’t happen. Spurs weren’t great today but still top.

    Lots more to come from Tottenham, I think. Leicester? I’m not so sure - they have already lost four games - suggesting fragility.
    Maurinho teams always implode sooner or later, admittedly usually in the third season. It was Leicester that got him sacked from Chelsea in 2015.

    Big night on Wednesday. One or other or both of Spurs or Pool will drop points, so if we can beat Everton...🙂

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    I bet it is.

    Our GP surgery has plans for a drive through vaccination at a local airfield. They trialled this process for this year's flu vaccine and it was a great success. I am sure most GP surgeries have similar plans ready to roll.
    Hopefully they do. But we have 800,000 shots already on hand, with millions more supposed to be about to drop. In week one we’ve done 250,000 people. Which is good, but not 800,000. Let’s hope the ramping up starts soon.
  • Options

    FPT- PT you mentioned that 99% of hospitalizations and deaths are in the vaccine priority groups (i.e. over 50s plus those with disease putting them at serious risk). I believe that for deaths, but I don't think that can be right for hospitalizations. Do you have a source?

    --AS

    PS: not an aggressive question, I'd just like to know. Also I might not reply because I've fallen asleep so thanks in advance!

    I heard Jonathan Van Tam say it after one of his weird train analogies.

    Only scientist who comes up with weird analogies than us discussing Brexit.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313
    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
    True. The interesting question then becomes what conclusion has been reached on efficacy. If it is considered equally effective (perhaps methodology of testing the asymptomatic pushed down its score) then it may as well be rolled out now to the same priority groups.

    If on the other hand it is a less effective vaccine, you’d want to prioritise the Pfizer for the elderly, which would mean a parallel programme of using the AZ now on younger people. Which isn’t the current plan.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,720
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    I bet it is.

    Our GP surgery has plans for a drive through vaccination at a local airfield. They trialled this process for this year's flu vaccine and it was a great success. I am sure most GP surgeries have similar plans ready to roll.
    Hopefully they do. But we have 800,000 shots already on hand, with millions more supposed to be about to drop. In week one we’ve done 250,000 people. Which is good, but not 800,000. Let’s hope the ramping up starts soon.
    To be fair, I should have qualified that the drive-through approach would work for the Oxford vaccine but not for the Pfizer one (especially as the latter now has the 15 minute observation period requirement).
  • Options

    FPT- PT you mentioned that 99% of hospitalizations and deaths are in the vaccine priority groups (i.e. over 50s plus those with disease putting them at serious risk). I believe that for deaths, but I don't think that can be right for hospitalizations. Do you have a source?

    --AS

    PS: not an aggressive question, I'd just like to know. Also I might not reply because I've fallen asleep so thanks in advance!

    I heard Jonathan Van Tam say it after one of his weird train analogies.

    Only scientist who comes up with weird analogies than us discussing Brexit.
    Thanks. I thought he said it for deaths. I'm fairly sure it would have been a mis-speak on hospitalizations though. The age profiles just don't match up. This is one reason why there's going to be a tricky time in between reducing deaths and unlocking restrictions, gated by hospital capacity I think.

    --AS
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985

    Torygrapgh saying 250k to have had the vaccine by the end of the week, Hancock over-promising again and saying millions before Christmas.

    To be fair, he said year end.

    Which is the limit of my festive spirit towards him.
    Well front page is wrong then, but when 3 weeks time, millions (plural), they would have to be running these clinics with opening hours like Primark and where is all the supply going to come from?

    If they do 200k a week, would be decent going. And much better for him to underpromise and say hope to get 500k done by Christmas and if they do get a million, he can boast about it.
    250k in five days. No doubt the pace will pick up.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,942
    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    It totally will be
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313
    RobD said:

    Torygrapgh saying 250k to have had the vaccine by the end of the week, Hancock over-promising again and saying millions before Christmas.

    To be fair, he said year end.

    Which is the limit of my festive spirit towards him.
    Well front page is wrong then, but when 3 weeks time, millions (plural), they would have to be running these clinics with opening hours like Primark and where is all the supply going to come from?

    If they do 200k a week, would be decent going. And much better for him to underpromise and say hope to get 500k done by Christmas and if they do get a million, he can boast about it.
    250k in five days. No doubt the pace will pick up.
    Hopefully. Noting that the first 250k include many of the easier ones - people already in situ because they work in the hospital, or are lying in bed there.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
    True. The interesting question then becomes what conclusion has been reached on efficacy. If it is considered equally effective (perhaps methodology of testing the asymptomatic pushed down its score) then it may as well be rolled out now to the same priority groups.

    If on the other hand it is a less effective vaccine, you’d want to prioritise the Pfizer for the elderly, which would mean a parallel programme of using the AZ now on younger people. Which isn’t the current plan.
    I think there is a huge chance that it only gets approved for healthy under 55s at this rate. The paper in the Lancet wasn't convincing for approval in the over 55s as the sample size was tiny.

    I think if that is the case then the government will luck into the best strategy as they can run the Pfizer programme for old and AZ for the young simultaneously. Do the Pfizer one in hospitals, clinics and GP surgeries from 9-5 and the AZ one from school halls, church halls and other community locations during evenings and weekends do 2m of each type of jab per week.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited December 2020
    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
    True. The interesting question then becomes what conclusion has been reached on efficacy. If it is considered equally effective (perhaps methodology of testing the asymptomatic pushed down its score) then it may as well be rolled out now to the same priority groups.

    If on the other hand it is a less effective vaccine, you’d want to prioritise the Pfizer for the elderly, which would mean a parallel programme of using the AZ now on younger people. Which isn’t the current plan.
    I think there is a huge chance that it only gets approved for healthy under 55s at this rate. The paper in the Lancet wasn't convincing for approval in the over 55s as the sample size was tiny.

    I think if that is the case then the government will luck into the best strategy as they can run the Pfizer programme for old and AZ for the young simultaneously. Do the Pfizer one in hospitals, clinics and GP surgeries from 9-5 and the AZ one from school halls, church halls and other community locations during evenings and weekends do 2m of each type of jab per week.
    Have Oxford / AZ given any reason why their trials had so few oldies...it seems like huge mismanagement of the study, given what we know about this disease.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,731

    Primus inter pares.

    Cyclefree among the header writers ?
    I’d suggest alternatives, but I don’t want to get into arguments with the legendarily modest.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610

    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
    True. The interesting question then becomes what conclusion has been reached on efficacy. If it is considered equally effective (perhaps methodology of testing the asymptomatic pushed down its score) then it may as well be rolled out now to the same priority groups.

    If on the other hand it is a less effective vaccine, you’d want to prioritise the Pfizer for the elderly, which would mean a parallel programme of using the AZ now on younger people. Which isn’t the current plan.
    I think there is a huge chance that it only gets approved for healthy under 55s at this rate. The paper in the Lancet wasn't convincing for approval in the over 55s as the sample size was tiny.

    I think if that is the case then the government will luck into the best strategy as they can run the Pfizer programme for old and AZ for the young simultaneously. Do the Pfizer one in hospitals, clinics and GP surgeries from 9-5 and the AZ one from school halls, church halls and other community locations during evenings and weekends do 2m of each type of jab per week.
    Have Oxford / AZ given any reason why their trials had so few oldies...it seems like huge mismanagement of the study, given what we know about this disease.
    I think the US trial was quite comprehensive but recruitment was halted and the FDA took ages to allow them to restart it, it probably put them back by a couple of months.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,313
    edited December 2020
    Masses of people have crowded into city centres across Italy to go shopping before the restrictions come into force. Wont end well.

    Meanwhile the highest case number areas in the Uk are now 1. Swale, north Kent, 2. Medway, north Kent, 3. Basildon, south Essex
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    It would match the timeline for the Pfizer jab/MHRA approval, although foxy has suggested the data is messy, so maybe not.
    I don't think the AZN would get through on current data in normal times, but these aren't normal times. Some better trial data is needed.

    Speaking to the nurse who did my jab this morning, it is not just the freezing, reconstitution and shelf life of 6 hours that are a problem, but also the vials need to be kept upright and not shaken or agitated. I think Pfizer is going to find that a problem outside major hubs. There were 8 injection stations at our Leicester hub.

    I think 250 000 in 5 days is good work. It takes a while to get the logistics, recording and recall working smoothly, then can speed up a bit.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728
    IanB2 said:

    MaxPB said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    Indeed, though the logistics for AZ will be much easier as it doesn't need specialist refrigeration and specialist locations. Pharmacists can start running vaccination programmes in small batches, not 500 doses at a time.
    True. The interesting question then becomes what conclusion has been reached on efficacy. If it is considered equally effective (perhaps methodology of testing the asymptomatic pushed down its score) then it may as well be rolled out now to the same priority groups.

    If on the other hand it is a less effective vaccine, you’d want to prioritise the Pfizer for the elderly, which would mean a parallel programme of using the AZ now on younger people. Which isn’t the current plan.
    I think the AZN paper was only symptomatic patients. What may have pushed down the score was using meningitis for the control patients, as any vaccine, even for unrelated bugs, primes the immune system. Meningitis vaccine may have some effect itself, Pfizer and moderna used saline, I recall.
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,796
    FPT

    Foxy said:

    The people here who wanted the "Swedish model" have gone oddly silent, will they ever admit they got it wrong?

    Sweden's deaths per million figure is lower than UK.

    That's despite a light sustainable lockdown that relied on public being cautious rather than locking and unlocking.

    The current trend is not good though:



    With a rate in England of 174/100 000 for comparison, roughly a third of Sweden's rate.
    Do you have Eng/Wal/Sco/NI figures?
    https://www.travellingtabby.com/uk-coronavirus-tracker/
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    But I doubt the capacity constraint is the amount of vaccine on hand, though?
    I bet it is.

    Our GP surgery has plans for a drive through vaccination at a local airfield. They trialled this process for this year's flu vaccine and it was a great success. I am sure most GP surgeries have similar plans ready to roll.
    Hopefully they do. But we have 800,000 shots already on hand, with millions more supposed to be about to drop. In week one we’ve done 250,000 people. Which is good, but not 800,000. Let’s hope the ramping up starts soon.
    To be fair, I should have qualified that the drive-through approach would work for the Oxford vaccine but not for the Pfizer one (especially as the latter now has the 15 minute observation period requirement).
    That 15 minute observation would not have been initially factored in, so presumably will have reduced the numbers they can now do in a given period?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,610
    Foxy said:

    I wonder, Hancock claim of millions getting a vaccine in next few weeks, could it be Oxford gets approved this week?

    It would match the timeline for the Pfizer jab/MHRA approval, although foxy has suggested the data is messy, so maybe not.
    I don't think the AZN would get through on current data in normal times, but these aren't normal times. Some better trial data is needed.

    Speaking to the nurse who did my jab this morning, it is not just the freezing, reconstitution and shelf life of 6 hours that are a problem, but also the vials need to be kept upright and not shaken or agitated. I think Pfizer is going to find that a problem outside major hubs. There were 8 injection stations at our Leicester hub.

    I think 250 000 in 5 days is good work. It takes a while to get the logistics, recording and recall working smoothly, then can speed up a bit.
    Yes, I think in normal times AZ would be told to go back and conduct a better trial with 40k participants covering all age categories better and randomising the half/full dosage trial properly. As you rightly say, we aren't in normal times and I think the regulator might take the view that a partial approval for the data that does make sense (under 55s) is better than nothing.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,101
    I wondered what the Express thought about Boris missing his latest deadline and was surprised to learn that the "EU caves to Boris sovereignty demands" and "Brussels stunned as Merkel bows to demands from German car industry".

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1372117/brexit-news-uk-eu-trade-talks-boris-johnson-ursula-von-der-leyen-no-deal-latest
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343
    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,130
    dixiedean said:

    I wondered what the Express thought about Boris missing his latest deadline and was surprised to learn that the "EU caves to Boris sovereignty demands" and "Brussels stunned as Merkel bows to demands from German car industry".

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1372117/brexit-news-uk-eu-trade-talks-boris-johnson-ursula-von-der-leyen-no-deal-latest

    Further down "Brussels Slammed for its Intransigents."
    They aren't named.
    They don't need to be named. They are the EU's Deplorables...
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,101
    Farage must have read a different manifesto to the rest of us.

    https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1338171268202377217
  • Options
    LadyGLadyG Posts: 2,221
    Le Carre was a fine writer. Beautiful prose stylist. But, I fear, basically a lefty traitor by the end. He inherited his father’s hypocrisy
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985

    Farage must have read a different manifesto to the rest of us.

    https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1338171268202377217

    What if the deal was "Boris Johnson gets everything he said in his manifesto"?
  • Options

    FPT- PT you mentioned that 99% of hospitalizations and deaths are in the vaccine priority groups (i.e. over 50s plus those with disease putting them at serious risk). I believe that for deaths, but I don't think that can be right for hospitalizations. Do you have a source?

    --AS

    PS: not an aggressive question, I'd just like to know. Also I might not reply because I've fallen asleep so thanks in advance!

    I heard Jonathan Van Tam say it after one of his weird train analogies.

    Only scientist who comes up with weird analogies than us discussing Brexit.
    Association of Consulting Actuaries paper confirms this figure:

    https://c8930375-0dbb-4319-ae2f-025f70d4b441.filesusr.com/ugd/ab45f7_a40832c6069842e6af33fcf2b06611bf.pdf
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,883
    edited December 2020
    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
  • Options
    Andy_JS said:

    Very sad news about John le Carré.

    Just heard. Used to see him strolling around Hampstead from time to time. He looked pretty good for 89, so I'm a bit shocked.
  • Options
    dixiedean said:

    I wondered what the Express thought about Boris missing his latest deadline and was surprised to learn that the "EU caves to Boris sovereignty demands" and "Brussels stunned as Merkel bows to demands from German car industry".

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1372117/brexit-news-uk-eu-trade-talks-boris-johnson-ursula-von-der-leyen-no-deal-latest

    Further down "Brussels Slammed for its Intransigents."
    They aren't named.
    Still intransigently attending orgies it seems

    https://twitter.com/DaveClark_AFP/status/1338183785305792515?s=20
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,992

    dixiedean said:

    I wondered what the Express thought about Boris missing his latest deadline and was surprised to learn that the "EU caves to Boris sovereignty demands" and "Brussels stunned as Merkel bows to demands from German car industry".

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1372117/brexit-news-uk-eu-trade-talks-boris-johnson-ursula-von-der-leyen-no-deal-latest

    Further down "Brussels Slammed for its Intransigents."
    They aren't named.
    Still intransigently attending orgies it seems

    https://twitter.com/DaveClark_AFP/status/1338183785305792515?s=20
    That's one way of being slammed I guess.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,101
    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html
  • Options
    LadyG said:

    Le Carre was a fine writer. Beautiful prose stylist. But, I fear, basically a lefty traitor by the end. He inherited his father’s hypocrisy

    No need to be mean, Sean.

    I hear he spoke very well of you.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,779

    LadyG said:

    Le Carre was a fine writer. Beautiful prose stylist. But, I fear, basically a lefty traitor by the end. He inherited his father’s hypocrisy

    No need to be mean, Sean.

    I hear he spoke very well of you.
    Was he a fan of the work of S.K. Tremayne? I didn't know.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    They're wargaming it two weeks before it happens?
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
  • Options
    FlannerFlanner Posts: 408
    rcs1000 said:

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    They're wargaming it two weeks before it happens?
    There is precisely one thing on which you can ALWAYS rely on The Loser.

    He's incapable of being serious
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,261
    TimT said:

    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
    The problem with this is the EU has other considerations that are more important than avoiding a no deal with Britain. The integrity of the single market, the future of the EU etc.

    Even being seen to give in to such negotiating tactics will harm all the EU's negotiations with other parties.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,985
    kamski said:

    TimT said:

    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
    The problem with this is the EU has other considerations that are more important than avoiding a no deal with Britain. The integrity of the single market, the future of the EU etc.

    Even being seen to give in to such negotiating tactics will harm all the EU's negotiations with other parties.
    Their main complaint was the proximity of the UK to the EU, hence why they wouldn't just copy/paste Canada. It's unlikely they are going to be in a similar situation with other countries that want to negotiate a FTA.
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,261
    RobD said:

    kamski said:

    TimT said:

    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
    The problem with this is the EU has other considerations that are more important than avoiding a no deal with Britain. The integrity of the single market, the future of the EU etc.

    Even being seen to give in to such negotiating tactics will harm all the EU's negotiations with other parties.
    Their main complaint was the proximity of the UK to the EU, hence why they wouldn't just copy/paste Canada. It's unlikely they are going to be in a similar situation with other countries that want to negotiate a FTA.
    Not really the point I was trying to make. I was criticising the chicken analogy.

    For neither side is avoiding no deal really a matter of life and death, they both have other things to consider.

    This will include, how they negotiate other deals. If the EU allows German car manufacturers to come in at the last minute and insist that the EU gives in to all the other side's demands because Britain is crazy, it will also undermine the ability of the EU to stick to an agreed position in any other negotiations.
  • Options
    Morning all! We're about to start warming what happens once we start stopping all vehicles at the border and asking them for paperwork. When this causes vast queues at least they will have plenty of time to make changes before we start doing it for real in 18 days time.

    It will be good if Shagger gets a deal that avoids tariffs. He is though going to sign a deal which imposes massive red tape costs and logistics delays costs on the UK. Taking a day or two to cross the border is hardly a better scenario for Britain than spending 2 minutes crossing the border as now.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728
    edited December 2020
    TimT said:

    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
    It is a particularly stupid tactic in the version of chicken to a clifftop.

    Also doesn't work well when playing head on chicken in a mini vs an articulated lorry.

    Being crazy in negotiations is not an advantage, when it is an ongoing relationship rather than a one off. We cannot change geography, so have to have an ongoing relationship.
  • Options

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    Some brilliant comments on there. Apparently if it's no deal and the EU impose tariffs we can just buy things from elsewhere and avoid the tariffs.

    This is the problem. Morons who don't have a clue how things work. If people buying cars have to pay a 10% import tariff it's 10% on cars from anywhere. If people eating food have to pay tariffs you can't bypass it buying from somewhere else.

    This is why Shagger will desperately avoid no deal if he can. Because the consequence of how the world works not being as they have told people won't go down well. Its not EU tariffs. Its tariffs. Its not other people paying the tariffs it's you the consumer. Its not sovereignty over faceless EU courts it's subservience to even more faceless WTO courts
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited December 2020
    TimT said:

    nico679 said:

    DavidL said:

    I don’t think that I agree with @Cyclefree’s analysis. This is not just a power play.

    Both sides want a deal or, perhaps more accurately, neither side wants the blame for failing to have a deal. The UK probably wants a deal more because it has a bigger impact on it. So the EU has the power, right?

    Not necessarily. In my experience a party that is willing to gamble more, to take the bigger risk, often gets what it wants. Their position may be irrational but if they hold in there sometimes the other side’s desire for a deal means agreement is reached on terms closer to what the reckless party wants than you would expect.

    The UK is being reckless here. They are giving the impression of being genuinely willing to risk no deal. That may be what they end up with. But it’s not a sure thing, whatever the objective measure of their respective strengths are.

    Interesting point . I think there’s two ways to look at this .The UK has both a weak and strong hand which might seem strange at the same time .

    The weak part is the EU has the much bigger market and no deal is likely to harm the UK more , the strong part is Johnson is now viewed as willing to burn the whole house down . The EU might be wondering that he might just be crazy enough to go for no deal . I personally think the sovereignty argument is a pile of tosh as all trade agreements mean you give some of that up especially with a big market but he can always revert to that and will have a mostly willing press to argue for him . Personally I don’t see any downsides to him getting a deal . He has an 80 seat majority , the ERG don’t have enough votes to cause him problems . Even if they hate the deal and say they put the letters in , he’d comfortably win that vote . The next election is years away , the public are unlikely to be voting on Brexit if he gets a deal but could well do if he doesn’t and the economy suffers. Interestingly any deal will go to a vote , legally this doesn’t need to happen but I suspect it’s only being done to put Labour in a difficult position .
    Indeed, DavidL.

    The time honored way to win at Chicken may appear irrational, but is highly rational. You signal your absolute determination to win by throwing your steering wheel out of the window (while the other driver is watching so he/she knows what you have done). The other driver then knows that he/she cannot win - the 'best' they can achieve is a head-on collision, so the only rational option left at that point is for that other driver to steer away and lose.

    Will is about the most important thing in negotiations - look at Putin.
    But it would be a head-on collision between a medium-sized van and a largeish but lighter milk-float. The EU and Britain are not equal in economic size, and this is why Johnson's technique hasn't worked so far.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,728
    edited December 2020

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    Some brilliant comments on there. Apparently if it's no deal and the EU impose tariffs we can just buy things from elsewhere and avoid the tariffs.

    This is the problem. Morons who don't have a clue how things work. If people buying cars have to pay a 10% import tariff it's 10% on cars from anywhere. If people eating food have to pay tariffs you can't bypass it buying from somewhere else.

    This is why Shagger will desperately avoid no deal if he can. Because the consequence of how the world works not being as they have told people won't go down well. Its not EU tariffs. Its tariffs. Its not other people paying the tariffs it's you the consumer. Its not sovereignty over faceless EU courts it's subservience to even more faceless WTO courts
    Its not quite true. If we apply WTO terms to the EU, we are obliged to apply those tariffs to all countries, apart from those that we have trade agreements with. I think that we could import Japanese and Korean cars tariff free on that basis. Not sure how that benefits our economy though.

    We could also set zero tariffs for all countries too, if we preferred, though once again that carries its own problems.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    Some brilliant comments on there. Apparently if it's no deal and the EU impose tariffs we can just buy things from elsewhere and avoid the tariffs.

    This is the problem. Morons who don't have a clue how things work. If people buying cars have to pay a 10% import tariff it's 10% on cars from anywhere. If people eating food have to pay tariffs you can't bypass it buying from somewhere else.

    This is why Shagger will desperately avoid no deal if he can. Because the consequence of how the world works not being as they have told people won't go down well. Its not EU tariffs. Its tariffs. Its not other people paying the tariffs it's you the consumer. Its not sovereignty over faceless EU courts it's subservience to even more faceless WTO courts
    Its not quite true. If we apply WTO terms to the EU, we are obliged to apply those tariffs to all countries, apart from those that we have trade agreements with. I think that we could import Japanese and Korean cars tariff free on that basis. Not sure how that benefits our economy though.

    We could also set zero tariffs for all countries too, if we preferred, though once again that carries its own problems.
    That's the exact point- the only way to avoid paying tariffs is to zero them - providing we can get that agreed with the WTO which will take years due to the endless challenges that it will face.

    You're right though, we won't have to pay tariffs on the cars Japan imports from Japan. No need for them to have an EU assembly plant any more, especially one who has been expensively cut off from both it's parts suppliers and it's main market.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,343

    "War games to mock up worst-case scenarios and test country's readiness for No Deal Brexit will be carried out THIS WEEK"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9049547/War-games-mock-worst-case-scenarios-No-Deal-Brexit-carried-WEEK.html

    Some brilliant comments on there. Apparently if it's no deal and the EU impose tariffs we can just buy things from elsewhere and avoid the tariffs.

    This is the problem. Morons who don't have a clue how things work. If people buying cars have to pay a 10% import tariff it's 10% on cars from anywhere. If people eating food have to pay tariffs you can't bypass it buying from somewhere else.

    This is why Shagger will desperately avoid no deal if he can. Because the consequence of how the world works not being as they have told people won't go down well. Its not EU tariffs. Its tariffs. Its not other people paying the tariffs it's you the consumer. Its not sovereignty over faceless EU courts it's subservience to even more faceless WTO courts
    I am not sure you understand how this works. So if the EU decide to impose a 10% tariff on UK produced cars then we may well retaliate on EU produced cars. That would increase the price to the UK consumer unless the EU exporter was willing to absorb the cost. But it has nothing to do with our arrangements with Japan, for example. If we have an agreement with Japan that does not involve tariffs then the UK consumer would be able to buy a tariff free car from there making that car more competitive than the EU one.

    In this way the balance of our trade would change. We would, at the margins, import less from the EU and more from elsewhere. Ideally we would have some import substitution as well. Tariffs in this way are a self inflicted wound for the EU who have run a large surplus with us for 20 years. They are designed to protect the EU manufacturers from unfair competition from the UK but they come at the cost of exports and jobs.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,731

    Farage must have read a different manifesto to the rest of us.

    https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1338171268202377217

    The last sentence is surprisingly honest.
This discussion has been closed.