Or it could mean a couple of months of committee investigation first.
Yes - other reports suggest they'll let Biden get his first 100 days out of the way - and confirm his cabinet - before starting Trump's trial
Senate should definitely NOT delay Biden's legislative agenda. On the other hand, no need for lengthy committee investigation, let alone days of debate.
EVERYBODY knows what happened, what Trumpsky and his minions did. Cut and dried.
Try'em quick and hang 'em high.
No, quite the opposite. They should take their time, de-politicise it as much as they possibly can, and gather as much really solid evidence as possible. What's the hurry, after all?
No way to "de-politicise" a Putsch. And no need to gather evidence, it's already been gathered.
One thing that unites Americans across the political spectrum, is the way the Congress of the United States can spend endless hours and days and weeks and months and years and years and years doing . . . nothing much.
I tend to agree with you on this. However, there are odd things which ought to take priority - for example the confirmation of a new Attorney General.
And it's not entirely true to say there's no evidence to gather. Subpoenas for the White House phone logs for the day in question might be very instructive, for example.
What I meant is, no need to gather evidence before voting to impeach OR convict Trumpsky for his high crimes and misdemeanors.
There WILL be lots of investigation all right - but it is NOT necessary for impeachment & conviction in this case.
Completely off topic from anything being discussed but relevant to discussions that often take place here . . . I was doing my daughter's schooling (Year 2, age 6) with her before and for history/geography she has been learning about explorers. Today's topic was to research and learn about Christopher Columbus.
So I started by talking to her about what I knew about Christopher Columbus, then we watched a couple of videos aimed at kids teaching about Christopher Columbus on YouTube.
What was noteworthy however was that the two videos could not have been more different. One, which looked quite dated, was all about heroic Christopher Columbus, how he discovered America and portrayed him in an unambiguously heroic and flattering light.
The other, newer, video taught about how Christopher Columbus grew up, how he got into exploration, how he got the idea of finding Asia, how he got approval to sail to find India but found America instead . . . then about how he was a cruel governor, how he was removed, arrested and imprisoned . . . and then into detail about how he was a slaver, that he took native Americans for slavery on the day he first found America and that he boasted that he could capture as many slaves as they could sell. This video emphasised we should remember Columbus for his discovery but not as a hero. It also led to an awkward conversation with my daughter when she asked what a slave is - a topic not covered before in her education as far as I know.
This left me thinking - there will be people growing up today only exposed to one or the other of these viewpoints depending upon their parents (and potentially their schools) preferences. People who grow up with an idealised and heroic view of Columbus - and others who view him as someone who might have been a great explorer, but was also a slaver and cruel to his subjects while Governor.
All of these facts are true, but not all are objectively covered by everyone and not everyone wants to learn everything. People who grow up with what are alternative sets of facts are going to grow up thinking very different things and looking at the world very differently.
So this got a lot more philosophical to me than I expect her teacher was thinking in setting the lesson plan - but I'm not sure how the world is best shaped to address these issues.
Good post. Thinking back to my education my history teacher emphasised sources (giving two very convincing but rather contrary pictures) and asking you to use them to argue your case.
I also had two politics teacher. One was an old school Labour supporter. A Scottish lady in her late 40s. The other was a one-nation wet pro-European Tory. An English man in his early 30s.
They didn't once thrust their views or opinions down my throat, but encouraged and supported me. We had debates, sure, but they were always respectful and about exploring different points of view.
I am grateful to them both, and I still have very fond memories of them both.
No-one forgets a good teacher.
My best ever teacher was my economics master, a Thatcherite free-marketeer who made a great show of the fact that he was pretty much the only Tory in the NUT. Had some great debates with him, and he was a very fair guy. A fair marker too – even, perhaps especially, when you disagreed with him.
By contrast, my hardcore leftie English master was the worst teacher I had.
I have no idea what the politics of any of my teachers was, or more recently of Fox jrs teachers.
We may be biased on here as to the importance of politics in people's lives . I suspect most teachers are not really political beyond choosing who to vote for once every 5 years at an appropriate time. They may be slightly more political than other social groups but i doubt any group (bar politicians ) are heavy in people who are really "political"
An 80-year-old man staying in his second home in Rhyl says he was told he cannot register with a local GP practice to receive the Covid vaccine.
... a second home in Rhyl ... 😳
The most deprived town in North Wales, patrolled by feral Scouse drug gangs and criminals.
As a child we had summer hols in a caravan in Rhyl, and Abergele, very grim....
I've only ever heard of the latter as the site of a train disaster!
My mother grew up in Rhyl. We go back occasionally, as some family still live there. Never the most glam place in the world, the loss of the seaside tourism trade has hit very hard.
Still, I remember going from Rhyl to Denbigh and thinking we'd gone back in time about 20 years....
My sister and I rented a house in Rhyl (East!) for a week in 2018. It is a good base for visiting North Wales, but getting something decent to eat in Rhyl in the evening is a problem.
Politico.com Biden dresses down his Covid team over plans to speed vaccinations The president-elect has criticized his Covid coordinator on multiple occasions in front of groups of transition officials.
Which throws up another priority for the Senate in the administration's first few days: ...Inside the Biden camp, officials pinned the success of their plan — and the 100-million pledge — largely on the ability to persuade Congress to quickly pass another relief package that includes billions of dollars for state and local governments. Biden has acknowledged this limiting factor...
And note that there are about a thousand other Federal appointments, besides that of the new AG, which will require Senate confirmation.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
Isn't it just - truly dreadful and I really fear for the US
It will wither away, in time.
It takes time for whale shit to find the bottom of the Marianas Trench.....
That's a depressing thought, given that whale shite is liquid! Spot on with dead whales, though.
The things you learn on this site.
Didn't we have an extended discussion of the size of a Blue Whale rectum in relation to Trump, the other day ? I believe that's when the non solid nature of whale excreta came up.
I missed that!
Me too. No way to rectify now either. You were either there or you weren't and I weren't.
Reminds me of when I went to Finningley air show as a boy to watch Concorde fly past. Waited for hours, finally had to go wee wee, queue to get in, got in, got going, and there was suddenly one hell of a noise.
I get the strong feeling that these lockdown pollings are exemplars of the form "I want these measures for THEM but not for me".
Don't think so. 14% opposed to the restrictions feels about right as the proportion who are bending the rules. Most people I know are being more restrictive than ever, refusing to meet even close relatives and in some cases terminating bubble arrangements.
But I do get reports of continuing uncertainty over what's allowed, what's legal but undesirable and what's illegal. The uncertainty about how far you can go for a walk is a good example, but also small shops are complaining that big stores that are allowed to remain open because they provide esssential goods are enthusiastically selling non-essential goods that otherwise the small shops might have supplied. Sainsbury etc. sell pretty much everything even though it's only the food, medicine and, bizarrely, flowers that are supposed to be essential.
you seem to only deal with people who want the government to tell them what to do all the time .
Normally, no - ironically I live in a very Conservative area where people are normally averse to Government intervention and just want to be left alone to enjoy their lives in congenial surroundings. But at present they do see it as like wartime, and they want to be told what they should do that will minimise risk for themselves and those they care about. They are still not anti-Government and will probably mostly vote Tory again, but they are exasperated by mixed messaging, meaningless optimism, and vacillation - when Boris hints that he's maybe thinking about tightening further in a few weeks, they are too well-brought-up to say Just Fucking Do It but that's the sentiment.
It seems the UK is paying a high price for Christmas Boris
FTFY
It is sad that you think it is OK to change a poster comment
Can you imagine if I start changing your posts
No! How did that happen?
Mods - seriously.
I have long objected to posters comments being edited by other posters
If we all started to do that the site's integrity would be impacted
There are people here who edit their own posts AFTER others have picked them up on their statements, mbut without making it clear.
I edit most of my posts.
Not checking for rogue apostrophes (quite rightly a PB cardinal sin) kindly added by my Chinese phone's spellchecker, demands a swift edit to avoid being strung up by the PB Apostrophe Stasi.
My most frequent fault, of many, is forgetting the second comma in a subordinate clause, something which as a lawyer I use far too often. I frequently wince when I see the post and go back to change this.
It is so long since I attended Grammar School. Punctuation (and grammar) has become far more hit and miss for me than it once was. I don't care, we're amongst friends.
My wife has an MA in English Language Studies. She owns a beautiful little book by Keith Waterhouse called, "English, our English, and how to sing it".
Thanks for an interesting header. I suspect vaccination certificates will be needed for travel and some occupations. IIt has long been a requirement that I am vaccinated for Hep B for example, so there is legal precedent.
I think though that uptake of the vaccine will probably not be much above the 70% of vulnerables who get the flu vaccine. Participation in breast, bowel, and cervical screening runs at similar 70% ish figures.
It is easy for middle class people to assume that others prioritise health issues the same as themselves.
Not all the rest will be anti vaxxers, some will just be slothful, some suspicious of all officialdom, and some will reckon that they are immune by reason of past infection, real or imagined.
So I suspect that we will be living with Covid-19 for a while.
I'm not sure. While there are people who have been lucky enough not to have had personal experience of a loved one suffering from cancer literally everyone in the country has been impacted by this pandemic. So I think higher than the rates you quote.
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
Isn't it just - truly dreadful and I really fear for the US
It would appear so, but would a coup have any chance at all if it didn't have the tacit support of a decent minority of the population?
The insurrection was essentially an expression of white supremacist sympathy. Doesn't surprise me that it registers at about 33%. Wouldn't be a whole lot less in this country.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
I get the strong feeling that these lockdown pollings are exemplars of the form "I want these measures for THEM but not for me".
Don't think so. 14% opposed to the restrictions feels about right as the proportion who are bending the rules. Most people I know are being more restrictive than ever, refusing to meet even close relatives and in some cases terminating bubble arrangements.
But I do get reports of continuing uncertainty over what's allowed, what's legal but undesirable and what's illegal. The uncertainty about how far you can go for a walk is a good example, but also small shops are complaining that big stores that are allowed to remain open because they provide esssential goods are enthusiastically selling non-essential goods that otherwise the small shops might have supplied. Sainsbury etc. sell pretty much everything even though it's only the food, medicine and, bizarrely, flowers that are supposed to be essential.
you seem to only deal with people who want the government to tell them what to do all the time .
Normally, no - ironically I live in a very Conservative area where people are normally averse to Government intervention and just want to be left alone to enjoy their lives in congenial surroundings. But at present they do see it as like wartime, and they want to be told what they should do that will minimise risk for themselves and those they care about. They are still not anti-Government and will probably mostly vote Tory again, but they are exasperated by mixed messaging, meaningless optimism, and vacillation - when Boris hints that he's maybe thinking about tightening further in a few weeks, they are too well-brought-up to say Just Fucking Do It but that's the sentiment.
Yes, I can see that. The meeting of minds of conservatives comfortable with state dictate and many collectivists.
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
It's staggering. Maybe if he just started shooting the people around him at random we could get below 25%?
If they were Washington politicians I wouldn’t be so sure.
The one thing I remember very clearly from my travels around the States in 2019 is how much ordinary Americans really hate Washington. Especially once you get west or south of there.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Unlikely for Access to Shops imo.
AFAICS most shops decided that it was not appropriate for their staff to enforce PPE back last April (ie medical explanation or mask) - which has been shoulder sloping bollocks for the last 9 months - which is why there exists the pickle which exists now.
Why would they change?
Personally I have moved from my local small Coop to the Tesco across the road because the Tesco has been more responsible on the PPE front, even though the Coop has better products.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Completely agree. And fire cleanses. Burn the idiots!
It is so long since I attended Grammar School. Punctuation (and grammar) has become far more hit and miss for me than it once was. I don't care, we're amongst friends.
My wife has an MA in English Language Studies. She owns a beautiful little book by Keith Waterhouse called, "English, our English, and how to sing it".
A friend of mine is (I kid you not!) a Professor of Global Englishes.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
Isn't it just - truly dreadful and I really fear for the US
Luckily we're smarter in this country. We would never countenance keeping a man around who repeatedly attacked the courts, the parliament, the media. Who kept advisers and cabinet members on because of their loyalty despite incompetence and serious misconduct.
...but he did invent three Coronavirus vaccines and was busy administering the vaccine to grateful voters in Bristol today.
Indeed. This is why your Benny Hill - though brilliant and much better than my Jimmy Savile which I've dropped - still does not capture the full essence of the man. You just can't see Hill inventing and injecting vaccines. Not in any serious sense anyway. It would be some potion to cause the ladies to giggle and disrobe rather than offer genuine protection against Covid-19.
I get the strong feeling that these lockdown pollings are exemplars of the form "I want these measures for THEM but not for me".
Don't think so. 14% opposed to the restrictions feels about right as the proportion who are bending the rules. Most people I know are being more restrictive than ever, refusing to meet even close relatives and in some cases terminating bubble arrangements.
But I do get reports of continuing uncertainty over what's allowed, what's legal but undesirable and what's illegal. The uncertainty about how far you can go for a walk is a good example, but also small shops are complaining that big stores that are allowed to remain open because they provide esssential goods are enthusiastically selling non-essential goods that otherwise the small shops might have supplied. Sainsbury etc. sell pretty much everything even though it's only the food, medicine and, bizarrely, flowers that are supposed to be essential.
you seem to only deal with people who want the government to tell them what to do all the time .
Normally, no - ironically I live in a very Conservative area where people are normally averse to Government intervention and just want to be left alone to enjoy their lives in congenial surroundings. But at present they do see it as like wartime, and they want to be told what they should do that will minimise risk for themselves and those they care about. They are still not anti-Government and will probably mostly vote Tory again, but they are exasperated by mixed messaging, meaningless optimism, and vacillation - when Boris hints that he's maybe thinking about tightening further in a few weeks, they are too well-brought-up to say Just Fucking Do It but that's the sentiment.
Yes, I can see that. The meeting of minds of conservatives comfortable with state dictate and many collectivists.
Strange times.
yes and as an ex-mp they probably think you are part of the establishment and need to be "nice" and sort of respectful and only sort of half complain they are not quite sure of the rules.
I suppose as it's Monday we shouldn't get too excited but perhaps some encouraging hints on new case numbers this evening. I'd love to see the decline in the number of those in hospital aged 75 and over, which I'm sure I saw last week, continuing which would be to this observer the first sign of the vaccination programme having an impact.
As to any further tightening of rules, the closure of construction sites would take a lot of people and vehicles off the transport system.
The more contentious issue will be the enforcement of mask-wearing regulations in shops. In East Ham, unlike some parts of rural Hampshire, I'd day mask wearing falls into three categories. One third don't wear them at all, one third wear them over the nose all the time and another third wear them at half mast outside shops and hitch them up to cover the nose when in shops so I suppose that puts mask wearing in shops at 67% rather than 99% reported elsewhere.
I can imagine my local supermarkets enforcing the mask wearing rules but will the corner shops or the other smaller stores who would risk losing business? We also see little or no adherence to social distancing at most shops (not all) and again you sense the bottom line is overriding the public health message.
Health vs Wealth - it's been the central question of public policy since the middle of March last year.
Completely off topic from anything being discussed but relevant to discussions that often take place here . . . I was doing my daughter's schooling (Year 2, age 6) with her before and for history/geography she has been learning about explorers. Today's topic was to research and learn about Christopher Columbus.
So I started by talking to her about what I knew about Christopher Columbus, then we watched a couple of videos aimed at kids teaching about Christopher Columbus on YouTube.
What was noteworthy however was that the two videos could not have been more different. One, which looked quite dated, was all about heroic Christopher Columbus, how he discovered America and portrayed him in an unambiguously heroic and flattering light.
The other, newer, video taught about how Christopher Columbus grew up, how he got into exploration, how he got the idea of finding Asia, how he got approval to sail to find India but found America instead . . . then about how he was a cruel governor, how he was removed, arrested and imprisoned . . . and then into detail about how he was a slaver, that he took native Americans for slavery on the day he first found America and that he boasted that he could capture as many slaves as they could sell. This video emphasised we should remember Columbus for his discovery but not as a hero. It also led to an awkward conversation with my daughter when she asked what a slave is - a topic not covered before in her education as far as I know.
This left me thinking - there will be people growing up today only exposed to one or the other of these viewpoints depending upon their parents (and potentially their schools) preferences. People who grow up with an idealised and heroic view of Columbus - and others who view him as someone who might have been a great explorer, but was also a slaver and cruel to his subjects while Governor.
All of these facts are true, but not all are objectively covered by everyone and not everyone wants to learn everything. People who grow up with what are alternative sets of facts are going to grow up thinking very different things and looking at the world very differently.
So this got a lot more philosophical to me than I expect her teacher was thinking in setting the lesson plan - but I'm not sure how the world is best shaped to address these issues.
Good post. Thinking back to my education my history teacher emphasised sources (giving two very convincing but rather contrary pictures) and asking you to use them to argue your case.
I also had two politics teacher. One was an old school Labour supporter. A Scottish lady in her late 40s. The other was a one-nation wet pro-European Tory. An English man in his early 30s.
They didn't once thrust their views or opinions down my throat, but encouraged and supported me. We had debates, sure, but they were always respectful and about exploring different points of view.
I am grateful to them both, and I still have very fond memories of them both.
No-one forgets a good teacher.
My best ever teacher was my economics master, a Thatcherite free-marketeer who made a great show of the fact that he was pretty much the only Tory in the NUT. Had some great debates with him, and he was a very fair guy. A fair marker too – even, perhaps especially, when you disagreed with him.
By contrast, my hardcore leftie English master was the worst teacher I had.
Back in the mid 70s my geography teacher was a EEC fanatic who as head of department insisted on "teaching" European geography using a textbook called "The Logic of Unity". Imagine trying to get away with that nowadays.
Both the teacher and the book were pretty rubbish, so bad that the memory stuck.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Why would you be at risk, if you've been vaccinated?
After vaccination, flu would presumably be the bigger risk.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
We have all lost things, sure
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
UP AGAINST THE WALL REDNECK MOTHER by Ray Wylie Hubbard, made famous by Jerry Jeff Walker
He was born in Oklahoma And his wife's name is Betty Lou Thelma Liz He's not responsible for what he's doing His mother made him what he is
And it's up against the wall, redneck mother Mother who has raised her son so well He's thirty four and drinkin' in a honky tonk Just kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Sure does like his Falstaff beer He likes to chase it down with that Wild Turkey liquor He drives a '57 GMC pickup truck Got a gun rack And a "Goat Ropers Needs Love Too" sticker
And it's up against the wall, redneck mother Mother who has raised her son so well He's thirty four drinkin' in a honky tonk Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Ah play it for mama M is for the mud flaps she gave me for my pickup truck O is for the oil I put on my hair T is for T-Bird H is for Haggard E is for Eggs And R is for Redneck
Up against the wall, redneck mother Mother who has raised her son so well He's thirty four and drinkin' in a honky tonk Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Yeah and it's up against the wall, redneck mother Mother who has raised her son so well He's thirty four drinkin' in a honky tonk Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
What's that spell, let's go get Oklahoma USA
addendum - Ray Wylie Hubbard is a native of the Sooner State, among other accomplishments.
And based on my own observations, can attest that goat ropers really do need love too . . .
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Why would you be at risk, if you've been vaccinated?
After vaccination, flu would presumably be the bigger risk.
Because vaccination while very good isn't 100% effective.
Hence why herd immunity matters. Why people shouldn't be antivax morons.
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
Isn't it just - truly dreadful and I really fear for the US
Luckily we're smarter in this country. We would never countenance keeping a man around who repeatedly attacked the courts, the parliament, the media. Who kept advisers and cabinet members on because of their loyalty despite incompetence and serious misconduct.
...but he did invent three Coronavirus vaccines and was busy administering the vaccine to grateful voters in Bristol today.
Indeed. This is why your Benny Hill - though brilliant and much better than my Jimmy Savile which I've dropped - still does not capture the full essence of the man. You just can't see Hill inventing and injecting vaccines. Not in any serious sense anyway. It would be some potion to cause the ladies to giggle and disrobe rather than offer genuine protection against Covid-19.
He was standing over the two nurses, in an uncomfortable Benny Hill pose. At least he didn't bloody salute!
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Why would you be at risk, if you've been vaccinated?
After vaccination, flu would presumably be the bigger risk.
Because vaccination while very good isn't 100% effective.
Hence why herd immunity matters. Why people shouldn't be antivax morons.
I totally agree that people shouldn't be antivax morons.
However, I fear that state or every day compulsion only makes the number of antivax morons more likely to rise.
It also just feels like a non starter. Biz has not been trying to stop custom throughout. I don't think they'd be likely to start AFTER we're back to normal
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Absolutely. Because through you, the Q twit infected the love of your life and they died. Your world is now empty, but for the anger that swells greater each day, as the ticking of the mantelpiece clock grows louder and louder. You put on your Charles Branson mask and went looking for them, and all Q twits like them.
And so it became classic hive maintenance, how we all turned upon the easily brainwashed and removed them all from the equation.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
Total garbage.
Many people have seen their lives change very little. Some are leading better lives. Others have been absolutely hammered.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
We have all lost things, sure
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
Or, putting it the other way, the older have to pay for their protection.
I wouldn`t oppose a higher income tax rate regime for the over 65s.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
Total garbage.
Many people have seen their lives change very little. Some are leading better lives. Others have been absolutely hammered.
It is so long since I attended Grammar School. Punctuation (and grammar) has become far more hit and miss for me than it once was. I don't care, we're amongst friends.
My wife has an MA in English Language Studies. She owns a beautiful little book by Keith Waterhouse called, "English, our English, and how to sing it".
A friend of mine is (I kid you not!) a Professor of Global Englishes.
That would be fascinating. Divided by a common language, etc.
Thanks for an interesting header. I suspect vaccination certificates will be needed for travel and some occupations. IIt has long been a requirement that I am vaccinated for Hep B for example, so there is legal precedent.
I think though that uptake of the vaccine will probably not be much above the 70% of vulnerables who get the flu vaccine. Participation in breast, bowel, and cervical screening runs at similar 70% ish figures.
It is easy for middle class people to assume that others prioritise health issues the same as themselves.
Not all the rest will be anti vaxxers, some will just be slothful, some suspicious of all officialdom, and some will reckon that they are immune by reason of past infection, real or imagined.
So I suspect that we will be living with Covid-19 for a while.
I'm not sure. While there are people who have been lucky enough not to have had personal experience of a loved one suffering from cancer literally everyone in the country has been impacted by this pandemic. So I think higher than the rates you quote.
The takeup of flu vaccine has been 75% amongst over 65s this year (figure from late Nov 2020, which is somewhat higher than usual), and afaik the Covid vaccine takeup is 85% amongst those offered so far.
Which perhaps implies a higher rate than the suggested 70%.
Though it will be lower in certain areas - I am tempted to suggest around Crawley and Glastonbury.
The wider issue will be not just air travel, but where else you will have to show a vaccination certificate before access is allowed. Cinemas? Nightclubs? Restaurants? Work in hospitality? Access to shops? It is quite easy to envisage an economy where you are very largely excluded without such a certificate. It may not be compulsory - but there will nonetheless be health apartheid.
FWIW that’s why insurance companies are not allowed to ask for results of hereditary genetic screening.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Nonsense. People who refuse vaccination are putting others at risk. If I go to a concert, why should I have to sit next to some idiot who has read some conspiracy-theory garbage and who therefore puts me at risk?
Why would you be at risk, if you've been vaccinated?
After vaccination, flu would presumably be the bigger risk.
Because the vaccine isn't 100% effective. Assume it's 95% effective. Suppose the guy has been heavily exposed to someone who is infected, a few days before. If I've been vaccinated but he hasn't, my risk is reduced to 5%. If we've both been vaccinated, it's reduced to the square of that, a cumulative risk between the two of us of 0.25%
In addition of course it also works in the other direction. If there are two unvaccinated dudes there, they each run an increased risk of catching the lurgi and spreading it to their circle.
(Of course this assumes that, as is thought likely but is not yet proven, the vaccine does protect against becoming infectious).
Or it could mean a couple of months of committee investigation first.
Yes - other reports suggest they'll let Biden get his first 100 days out of the way - and confirm his cabinet - before starting Trump's trial
Senate should definitely NOT delay Biden's legislative agenda. On the other hand, no need for lengthy committee investigation, let alone days of debate.
EVERYBODY knows what happened, what Trumpsky and his minions did. Cut and dried.
Try'em quick and hang 'em high.
No, quite the opposite. They should take their time, de-politicise it as much as they possibly can, and gather as much really solid evidence as possible. What's the hurry, after all?
They may also have had lots of MAGA loons tried and convicted pleading "Trump told me to do it!" by then....
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
We have all lost things, sure
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
I am trying to find disagreement with your post, unfortunately it is wholly accurate.
This sad turkey is (almost literally) getting plucked right before our eyes.
Did PBers pick up on the cancellation of his book contract re: his weighty tome on the Evils of Big Tech, thus depriving him of a political boost for 2024 as well as a profit center for the here and now.
When John Freaking Danforth says giving you a leg up the greasy pool was the "worst decision of my life" that AIN'T just whistling Dixie. It's a sign the wheels are falling off.
Don't forget - Philip has assured us that there will be no disruption at the border as absolutely everyone will submit all their paperwork electronically in advance. Definitely no mega queues whilst bemused customs officials search for contraband, not at all.
Is that another "joke" because I said the exact opposite! 🙄
I always said there would be disruption in January as people get used to the new paperwork, but there would be an incentive for businesses to get their paperwork in order to make it as smooth as possible. 🙄
This isn't "disruption in January". Do you think these new checks will stop in February?
This isn't paperwork. This is sovereignty in action. You want to come into our country, lets check you aren't bringing in any contraband, open your boot please.
Nor can the paperwork be made smooth. It doesn't work in our supply chain. The solution to "spend money filling in paperwork which both you and your customers then need to hire a customs agent to process" will be the rapid end to UK imports and exports.
We have cut ourselves off from our biggest market. Contrary to delusional wank bank fantasies about CANZUK there are no alternative markets of equivalent size and distance. We either - as Make UK et al are saying - negotiate a new deal that works. Or we both lose our exporters and lose the ability to import stuff apart from at vast cost.
"Oh no we won't" counters Philip with his extensive knowledge of fuck all.
"Oh no we won't" because it is total and utter bullshit.
I do understand economics and work in business. And economically the majority of our exports already take place outside the EU. Without being in their customs union.
Yes some trade may be disrupted, but the idea that we stop exporting is complete bullshit. Some imports may stop if people can't find a reason to do the paperwork etc - but others will continue. A new equilibrium will be reached.
If your logic were right we would have zero trade with the rest of the world as we're not in their customs union. It is nonsense.
When we trade with the rest of the world we have established processes and prices. Punters look at the prices and weigh up if they want to buy it or not.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
Completely off topic from anything being discussed but relevant to discussions that often take place here . . . I was doing my daughter's schooling (Year 2, age 6) with her before and for history/geography she has been learning about explorers. Today's topic was to research and learn about Christopher Columbus.
So I started by talking to her about what I knew about Christopher Columbus, then we watched a couple of videos aimed at kids teaching about Christopher Columbus on YouTube.
What was noteworthy however was that the two videos could not have been more different. One, which looked quite dated, was all about heroic Christopher Columbus, how he discovered America and portrayed him in an unambiguously heroic and flattering light.
The other, newer, video taught about how Christopher Columbus grew up, how he got into exploration, how he got the idea of finding Asia, how he got approval to sail to find India but found America instead . . . then about how he was a cruel governor, how he was removed, arrested and imprisoned . . . and then into detail about how he was a slaver, that he took native Americans for slavery on the day he first found America and that he boasted that he could capture as many slaves as they could sell. This video emphasised we should remember Columbus for his discovery but not as a hero. It also led to an awkward conversation with my daughter when she asked what a slave is - a topic not covered before in her education as far as I know.
This left me thinking - there will be people growing up today only exposed to one or the other of these viewpoints depending upon their parents (and potentially their schools) preferences. People who grow up with an idealised and heroic view of Columbus - and others who view him as someone who might have been a great explorer, but was also a slaver and cruel to his subjects while Governor.
All of these facts are true, but not all are objectively covered by everyone and not everyone wants to learn everything. People who grow up with what are alternative sets of facts are going to grow up thinking very different things and looking at the world very differently.
So this got a lot more philosophical to me than I expect her teacher was thinking in setting the lesson plan - but I'm not sure how the world is best shaped to address these issues.
Good post. Thinking back to my education my history teacher emphasised sources (giving two very convincing but rather contrary pictures) and asking you to use them to argue your case.
I also had two politics teacher. One was an old school Labour supporter. A Scottish lady in her late 40s. The other was a one-nation wet pro-European Tory. An English man in his early 30s.
They didn't once thrust their views or opinions down my throat, but encouraged and supported me. We had debates, sure, but they were always respectful and about exploring different points of view.
I am grateful to them both, and I still have very fond memories of them both.
No-one forgets a good teacher.
My best ever teacher was my economics master, a Thatcherite free-marketeer who made a great show of the fact that he was pretty much the only Tory in the NUT. Had some great debates with him, and he was a very fair guy. A fair marker too – even, perhaps especially, when you disagreed with him.
By contrast, my hardcore leftie English master was the worst teacher I had.
I have no idea what the politics of any of my teachers was, or more recently of Fox jrs teachers.
I had no trendy leftist teachers at all. Very trad school. Then I went to totally apolitical Imperial. Then Deloittes and ACA. Then the full monty City.
But despite this reactionary brainwashing I am ok. I can think about high taxes and white privilege without going into a tizz.
Today's case numbers do I think give grounds for further optimism that the measures in place are starting to contain the virus. On three of the last five days the total case numbers announced have been lower than the number seven days earlier on the same day of the week. It's still early days, but if you were looking for evidence of plateuing of cases prior to an actual downturn, these are the sort of numbers that you would be looking for.
Today's case numbers do I think give grounds for further optimism that the measures in place are starting to contain the virus. On three of the last five days the total case numbers announced have been lower than the number seven days earlier on the same day of the week. It's still early days, but if you were looking for evidence of plateuing of cases prior to an actual downturn, these are the sort of numbers that you would be looking for.
Today's figures are from yesterday and weekend figures have always been lower for reporting reasons.
It seems the UK is paying a high price for Christmas Boris
FTFY
It is sad that you think it is OK to change a poster comment
Can you imagine if I start changing your posts
No! How did that happen?
Mods - seriously.
I have long objected to posters comments being edited by other posters
If we all started to do that the site's integrity would be impacted
There are people here who edit their own posts AFTER others have picked them up on their statements, mbut without making it clear.
I edit most of my posts.
Not checking for rogue apostrophes (quite rightly a PB cardinal sin) kindly added by my Chinese phone's spellchecker, demands a swift edit to avoid being strung up by the PB Apostrophe Stasi.
That's fair enough - I was moaning about very substantial changes of meaning.
We were staying in a large hotel in LA when there was a 12 hour power failure and we were unable to get out of our 12th floor room, but apparently he was locked in at the same time in the large conference hall on the ground floor
Today's case numbers do I think give grounds for further optimism that the measures in place are starting to contain the virus. On three of the last five days the total case numbers announced have been lower than the number seven days earlier on the same day of the week. It's still early days, but if you were looking for evidence of plateuing of cases prior to an actual downturn, these are the sort of numbers that you would be looking for.
Yes. Another hopeful early indication is that the Zoe app is showing a reduction to 62K cases a day, down from 70K a few days ago. Still very high, of course.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
We have all lost things, sure
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
I am trying to find disagreement with your post, unfortunately it is wholly accurate.
I get the strong feeling that these lockdown pollings are exemplars of the form "I want these measures for THEM but not for me".
Don't think so. 14% opposed to the restrictions feels about right as the proportion who are bending the rules. Most people I know are being more restrictive than ever, refusing to meet even close relatives and in some cases terminating bubble arrangements.
But I do get reports of continuing uncertainty over what's allowed, what's legal but undesirable and what's illegal. The uncertainty about how far you can go for a walk is a good example, but also small shops are complaining that big stores that are allowed to remain open because they provide esssential goods are enthusiastically selling non-essential goods that otherwise the small shops might have supplied. Sainsbury etc. sell pretty much everything even though it's only the food, medicine and, bizarrely, flowers that are supposed to be essential.
you seem to only deal with people who want the government to tell them what to do all the time .
Normally, no - ironically I live in a very Conservative area where people are normally averse to Government intervention and just want to be left alone to enjoy their lives in congenial surroundings. But at present they do see it as like wartime, and they want to be told what they should do that will minimise risk for themselves and those they care about. They are still not anti-Government and will probably mostly vote Tory again, but they are exasperated by mixed messaging, meaningless optimism, and vacillation - when Boris hints that he's maybe thinking about tightening further in a few weeks, they are too well-brought-up to say Just Fucking Do It but that's the sentiment.
Yes, I can see that. The meeting of minds of conservatives comfortable with state dictate and many collectivists.
Strange times.
yes and as an ex-mp they probably think you are part of the establishment and need to be "nice" and sort of respectful and only sort of half complain they are not quite sure of the rules.
I think you over-estimate the reputation of ex-MPs .
I get the strong feeling that these lockdown pollings are exemplars of the form "I want these measures for THEM but not for me".
Don't think so. 14% opposed to the restrictions feels about right as the proportion who are bending the rules. Most people I know are being more restrictive than ever, refusing to meet even close relatives and in some cases terminating bubble arrangements.
But I do get reports of continuing uncertainty over what's allowed, what's legal but undesirable and what's illegal. The uncertainty about how far you can go for a walk is a good example, but also small shops are complaining that big stores that are allowed to remain open because they provide esssential goods are enthusiastically selling non-essential goods that otherwise the small shops might have supplied. Sainsbury etc. sell pretty much everything even though it's only the food, medicine and, bizarrely, flowers that are supposed to be essential.
you seem to only deal with people who want the government to tell them what to do all the time .
Normally, no - ironically I live in a very Conservative area where people are normally averse to Government intervention and just want to be left alone to enjoy their lives in congenial surroundings. But at present they do see it as like wartime, and they want to be told what they should do that will minimise risk for themselves and those they care about. They are still not anti-Government and will probably mostly vote Tory again, but they are exasperated by mixed messaging, meaningless optimism, and vacillation - when Boris hints that he's maybe thinking about tightening further in a few weeks, they are too well-brought-up to say Just Fucking Do It but that's the sentiment.
Yes, I can see that. The meeting of minds of conservatives comfortable with state dictate and many collectivists.
Strange times.
And then there are the Six Ells types, who find the whole thing utterly hateful.
Don't forget - Philip has assured us that there will be no disruption at the border as absolutely everyone will submit all their paperwork electronically in advance. Definitely no mega queues whilst bemused customs officials search for contraband, not at all.
Is that another "joke" because I said the exact opposite! 🙄
I always said there would be disruption in January as people get used to the new paperwork, but there would be an incentive for businesses to get their paperwork in order to make it as smooth as possible. 🙄
This isn't "disruption in January". Do you think these new checks will stop in February?
This isn't paperwork. This is sovereignty in action. You want to come into our country, lets check you aren't bringing in any contraband, open your boot please.
Nor can the paperwork be made smooth. It doesn't work in our supply chain. The solution to "spend money filling in paperwork which both you and your customers then need to hire a customs agent to process" will be the rapid end to UK imports and exports.
We have cut ourselves off from our biggest market. Contrary to delusional wank bank fantasies about CANZUK there are no alternative markets of equivalent size and distance. We either - as Make UK et al are saying - negotiate a new deal that works. Or we both lose our exporters and lose the ability to import stuff apart from at vast cost.
"Oh no we won't" counters Philip with his extensive knowledge of fuck all.
"Oh no we won't" because it is total and utter bullshit.
I do understand economics and work in business. And economically the majority of our exports already take place outside the EU. Without being in their customs union.
Yes some trade may be disrupted, but the idea that we stop exporting is complete bullshit. Some imports may stop if people can't find a reason to do the paperwork etc - but others will continue. A new equilibrium will be reached.
If your logic were right we would have zero trade with the rest of the world as we're not in their customs union. It is nonsense.
When we trade with the rest of the world we have established processes and prices. Punters look at the prices and weigh up if they want to buy it or not.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
Yes we have a change happening - file that under "no shit Sherlock".
Yes that can be disruptive - I always acknowledged that and have never denied that.
Yes some trade may cease or become unprofitable that wasn't unprofitable before - sucks but it is what it is.
So what are you objecting to precisely from my arguments? Yes I acknowledge that there will be disruption. Yes I acknowledge the costs. Those were debated in 2016 to death.
If you wanted to remain in the Single Market and Customs Union you should have voted Remain. Sorry but that too is what it is.
Disruption is what was voted for. Life changes. Get on with it and move on.
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
Given the week that was, think this may be appropriate . . .
GOD REST HIS SOUL by Greg Allman
A man lay dying in the streets A thousand people fell down on their knees Any other day he would have been... Preaching Reaching all the people there
Oh Lord Lord But Lord knows I can't change what I saw I say God rest his soul
The Memphis battle ground was red Cause blood came pouring from his head Women and children fallin' down Crying For the man they loved so well Oh Lord Lord
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw I say God rest his soul
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw I say God rest his soul
The morning sun will rise again With all the patience growing thin What we gonna do when war is come. and we're Dying
Dying for the cause I know But Lord knows I can't change what I saw Say God rest his soul
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
I admit that I tuned out of the Rashford thing, but is this what he was arguing for?
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
HOWEVER.
FSM does not usually cost £6 per day.
I suspect the cost of this provision is not far away from FSM provision. Its pennies given the scale of canteens.
The problem is prior profligacy, not current austerity. Why on earth were they giving £30 vouchers previously?
Today's case numbers do I think give grounds for further optimism that the measures in place are starting to contain the virus. On three of the last five days the total case numbers announced have been lower than the number seven days earlier on the same day of the week. It's still early days, but if you were looking for evidence of plateuing of cases prior to an actual downturn, these are the sort of numbers that you would be looking for.
Today's figures are from yesterday and weekend figures have always been lower for reporting reasons.
Last weekend's figures are lower than the weekend before
33% approval after having attempted a violent coup to overturn an election is still pretty remarkable. And appalling.
Isn't it just - truly dreadful and I really fear for the US
Luckily we're smarter in this country. We would never countenance keeping a man around who repeatedly attacked the courts, the parliament, the media. Who kept advisers and cabinet members on because of their loyalty despite incompetence and serious misconduct.
...but he did invent three Coronavirus vaccines and was busy administering the vaccine to grateful voters in Bristol today.
Indeed. This is why your Benny Hill - though brilliant and much better than my Jimmy Savile which I've dropped - still does not capture the full essence of the man. You just can't see Hill inventing and injecting vaccines. Not in any serious sense anyway. It would be some potion to cause the ladies to giggle and disrobe rather than offer genuine protection against Covid-19.
He was standing over the two nurses, in an uncomfortable Benny Hill pose. At least he didn't bloody salute!
Don't forget - Philip has assured us that there will be no disruption at the border as absolutely everyone will submit all their paperwork electronically in advance. Definitely no mega queues whilst bemused customs officials search for contraband, not at all.
Is that another "joke" because I said the exact opposite! 🙄
I always said there would be disruption in January as people get used to the new paperwork, but there would be an incentive for businesses to get their paperwork in order to make it as smooth as possible. 🙄
This isn't "disruption in January". Do you think these new checks will stop in February?
This isn't paperwork. This is sovereignty in action. You want to come into our country, lets check you aren't bringing in any contraband, open your boot please.
Nor can the paperwork be made smooth. It doesn't work in our supply chain. The solution to "spend money filling in paperwork which both you and your customers then need to hire a customs agent to process" will be the rapid end to UK imports and exports.
We have cut ourselves off from our biggest market. Contrary to delusional wank bank fantasies about CANZUK there are no alternative markets of equivalent size and distance. We either - as Make UK et al are saying - negotiate a new deal that works. Or we both lose our exporters and lose the ability to import stuff apart from at vast cost.
"Oh no we won't" counters Philip with his extensive knowledge of fuck all.
"Oh no we won't" because it is total and utter bullshit.
I do understand economics and work in business. And economically the majority of our exports already take place outside the EU. Without being in their customs union.
Yes some trade may be disrupted, but the idea that we stop exporting is complete bullshit. Some imports may stop if people can't find a reason to do the paperwork etc - but others will continue. A new equilibrium will be reached.
If your logic were right we would have zero trade with the rest of the world as we're not in their customs union. It is nonsense.
When we trade with the rest of the world we have established processes and prices. Punters look at the prices and weigh up if they want to buy it or not.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
Yes we have a change happening - file that under "no shit Sherlock".
Yes that can be disruptive - I always acknowledged that and have never denied that.
Yes some trade may cease or become unprofitable that wasn't unprofitable before - sucks but it is what it is.
So what are you objecting to precisely from my arguments? Yes I acknowledge that there will be disruption. Yes I acknowledge the costs. Those were debated in 2016 to death.
If you wanted to remain in the Single Market and Customs Union you should have voted Remain. Sorry but that too is what it is.
Disruption is what was voted for. Life changes. Get on with it and move on.
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
HOWEVER.
FSM does not usually cost £6 per day.
I suspect the cost of this provision is not far away from FSM provision. Its pennies given the scale of canteens.
The problem is prior profligacy, not current austerity. Why on earth were they giving £30 vouchers previously?
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
I admit that I tuned out of the Rashford thing, but is this what he was arguing for?
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
HOWEVER.
FSM does not usually cost £6 per day.
I suspect the cost of this provision is not far away from FSM provision. Its pennies given the scale of canteens.
The problem is prior profligacy, not current austerity. Why on earth were they giving £30 vouchers previously?
It's for 10 days. £15 pw like the previous vouchers.
Politico.com Biden dresses down his Covid team over plans to speed vaccinations The president-elect has criticized his Covid coordinator on multiple occasions in front of groups of transition officials.
Which throws up another priority for the Senate in the administration's first few days: ...Inside the Biden camp, officials pinned the success of their plan — and the 100-million pledge — largely on the ability to persuade Congress to quickly pass another relief package that includes billions of dollars for state and local governments. Biden has acknowledged this limiting factor...
And note that there are about a thousand other Federal appointments, besides that of the new AG, which will require Senate confirmation.
Which is why, when it comes to considering the impeachment resolution sure to come from US House, the US Senate would seen to have these options: 1. Immediately embark upon lengthy 2. Quickly conduct short trial; keeping speeches & etc to bare minimum, in fact giving bulk of time (week at very most) to defendant. 3. Defer trial pending joint congressional investigation by joint select committee, which will NOT impede President Biden's legislative agenda, confirmations AND above all COVID vaccinations and ongoing COVID crisis.
IF the votes are there to convict right now, then my preference is Door #2. Otherwise, #3
Hopefully the Gov't will have some sort of official system to say you've received the vaccine - can see it being a requirement of international travel once the US and EU really get stuck into it; even if nothing is used here.
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
I admit that I tuned out of the Rashford thing, but is this what he was arguing for?
This is not what he was arguing for. He wants money spent on feeding children, not lining the pockets of corporate monoliths
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
HOWEVER.
FSM does not usually cost £6 per day.
I suspect the cost of this provision is not far away from FSM provision. Its pennies given the scale of canteens.
The problem is prior profligacy, not current austerity. Why on earth were they giving £30 vouchers previously?
I think you have hit the nail on the head. There doesn't seem to be any source to the idea it is actually costing the council £30.
If that were meant to provide eg the school meals of one person then it absolutely should. There is enough there to provide the meals for somebody.
If the Council has ordered a food bag costing a fiver then this is more like it. Who knows?
Don't forget - Philip has assured us that there will be no disruption at the border as absolutely everyone will submit all their paperwork electronically in advance. Definitely no mega queues whilst bemused customs officials search for contraband, not at all.
Is that another "joke" because I said the exact opposite! 🙄
I always said there would be disruption in January as people get used to the new paperwork, but there would be an incentive for businesses to get their paperwork in order to make it as smooth as possible. 🙄
This isn't "disruption in January". Do you think these new checks will stop in February?
This isn't paperwork. This is sovereignty in action. You want to come into our country, lets check you aren't bringing in any contraband, open your boot please.
Nor can the paperwork be made smooth. It doesn't work in our supply chain. The solution to "spend money filling in paperwork which both you and your customers then need to hire a customs agent to process" will be the rapid end to UK imports and exports.
We have cut ourselves off from our biggest market. Contrary to delusional wank bank fantasies about CANZUK there are no alternative markets of equivalent size and distance. We either - as Make UK et al are saying - negotiate a new deal that works. Or we both lose our exporters and lose the ability to import stuff apart from at vast cost.
"Oh no we won't" counters Philip with his extensive knowledge of fuck all.
"Oh no we won't" because it is total and utter bullshit.
I do understand economics and work in business. And economically the majority of our exports already take place outside the EU. Without being in their customs union.
Yes some trade may be disrupted, but the idea that we stop exporting is complete bullshit. Some imports may stop if people can't find a reason to do the paperwork etc - but others will continue. A new equilibrium will be reached.
If your logic were right we would have zero trade with the rest of the world as we're not in their customs union. It is nonsense.
When we trade with the rest of the world we have established processes and prices. Punters look at the prices and weigh up if they want to buy it or not.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
Yes we have a change happening - file that under "no shit Sherlock".
Yes that can be disruptive - I always acknowledged that and have never denied that.
Yes some trade may cease or become unprofitable that wasn't unprofitable before - sucks but it is what it is.
So what are you objecting to precisely from my arguments? Yes I acknowledge that there will be disruption. Yes I acknowledge the costs. Those were debated in 2016 to death.
If you wanted to remain in the Single Market and Customs Union you should have voted Remain. Sorry but that too is what it is.
Disruption is what was voted for. Life changes. Get on with it and move on.
"Fuck Business"
"Shit happens"
We had a referendum, people made the argument to stay in the Single Market - and lost that argument. You voted against Remaining in the EU. Get over it.
Time to move on. Costs will be incurred in some areas, that is the price we pay for Brexit. I don't deny it. Why do you object to me not denying it?
Don't forget - Philip has assured us that there will be no disruption at the border as absolutely everyone will submit all their paperwork electronically in advance. Definitely no mega queues whilst bemused customs officials search for contraband, not at all.
Is that another "joke" because I said the exact opposite! 🙄
I always said there would be disruption in January as people get used to the new paperwork, but there would be an incentive for businesses to get their paperwork in order to make it as smooth as possible. 🙄
This isn't "disruption in January". Do you think these new checks will stop in February?
This isn't paperwork. This is sovereignty in action. You want to come into our country, lets check you aren't bringing in any contraband, open your boot please.
Nor can the paperwork be made smooth. It doesn't work in our supply chain. The solution to "spend money filling in paperwork which both you and your customers then need to hire a customs agent to process" will be the rapid end to UK imports and exports.
We have cut ourselves off from our biggest market. Contrary to delusional wank bank fantasies about CANZUK there are no alternative markets of equivalent size and distance. We either - as Make UK et al are saying - negotiate a new deal that works. Or we both lose our exporters and lose the ability to import stuff apart from at vast cost.
"Oh no we won't" counters Philip with his extensive knowledge of fuck all.
"Oh no we won't" because it is total and utter bullshit.
I do understand economics and work in business. And economically the majority of our exports already take place outside the EU. Without being in their customs union.
Yes some trade may be disrupted, but the idea that we stop exporting is complete bullshit. Some imports may stop if people can't find a reason to do the paperwork etc - but others will continue. A new equilibrium will be reached.
If your logic were right we would have zero trade with the rest of the world as we're not in their customs union. It is nonsense.
When we trade with the rest of the world we have established processes and prices. Punters look at the prices and weigh up if they want to buy it or not.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
He was banging on about his "new equilibrium" yesterday. What does "new equilibrium" even mean? Perhaps the new equilibrium means that shelves that were previously full at Tesco in Antrim are now empty, so at some point in time they were as equally full as they were empty.
You seemed to have somewhat changed your mind, Stocky -- recalling an earlier conversation.
No vaccine certificate -- no travel, no theatre, no gigs, no restaurant meals, no schools for your children. Perfectly fair.
The upside is no skiing.
One inevitably develops a mental picture of other posters, and I accept this could well be way off the mark.
I drew my conclusions because of the general tone of your comments. For example, the comment I responded to said, re young people:-
"So, they not going to listen to Hancock blathering on about "Save Grandpa". After all, what did Gramps ever do for them? He is a greedy, selfish man who denied the benefits he received to younger people."
That speaks to me of an angry and bitter individual. The issue has never been simply one of saving old people. If that had been the case it would have made far more sense to completely lock down the over 70s and let everyone else carry on as normal.
If some young people can't see beyond the ends of their noses and think their right to party trumps everything else then so be it but then it's no good whining about the consequences in years to come.
It isn;t about the right to party.
Its about the right to a decent, uninterrupted education. The right to mind broadening travel. The right to play team sport. The right to access mind broadening culture like film and theatre. The right to exchange ideas with other young people. The right to work. The right to protest in groups. The right not to be overburdened by crushing debt and deficit. The right to good mental health.
Young people have been stripped of all of these fundamental rights. The main aim has been to protect a cohort of people who have already lived a far longer and far better life than any generation in history. Ever. Some of these people do not even want this protection.
We have all been robbed of things, we are in the middle of a worldwide pandemic. Grow up
We have all lost things, sure
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
I would respectfully suggest that a 45 year old with a family who has lost a job has suffered more than the youngsters you describe, as have all the medical staff that have died of the disease.
Everyone is suffering disruption to their lives to a greater or lesser extent and in different ways and we are all going to be paying for it for many years.
If it was simply about protecting the elderly the government could have legislated to keep them completely locked-down and let everyone else get on with it. However that is only a part of the problem which is precisely why no government I can see anywhere has gone up that route. There are no easy solutions to dealing with a pandemic.
I am no supporter of this Government but it seems to me that they are already compensating those who are suffering most as best they can with the furlough scheme and other initiatives.
I simply don't buy the notion that is all about the young making huge sacrifices for the old. It's just sowing division
Comments
There WILL be lots of investigation all right - but it is NOT necessary for impeachment & conviction in this case.
It is a good base for visiting North Wales, but getting something decent to eat in Rhyl in the evening is a problem.
...Inside the Biden camp, officials pinned the success of their plan — and the 100-million pledge — largely on the ability to persuade Congress to quickly pass another relief package that includes billions of dollars for state and local governments. Biden has acknowledged this limiting factor...
And note that there are about a thousand other Federal appointments, besides that of the new AG, which will require Senate confirmation.
If the government goes down this route I think that asking for the vaccination certificate should be illegal EXCEPT for certain situations
Reminds me of when I went to Finningley air show as a boy to watch Concorde fly past. Waited for hours, finally had to go wee wee, queue to get in, got in, got going, and there was suddenly one hell of a noise.
Apparently not.
Melania Trump pays tribute to dead of Capitol attack but casts herself as victim
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/11/melania-trump-capitol-attack
My wife has an MA in English Language Studies. She owns a beautiful little book by Keith Waterhouse called, "English, our English, and how to sing it".
From case data
From hospital data
The insurrection was essentially an expression of white supremacist sympathy. Doesn't surprise me that it registers at about 33%. Wouldn't be a whole lot less in this country.
Strange times.
The one thing I remember very clearly from my travels around the States in 2019 is how much ordinary Americans really hate Washington. Especially once you get west or south of there.
AFAICS most shops decided that it was not appropriate for their staff to enforce PPE back last April (ie medical explanation or mask) - which has been shoulder sloping bollocks for the last 9 months - which is why there exists the pickle which exists now.
Why would they change?
Personally I have moved from my local small Coop to the Tesco across the road because the Tesco has been more responsible on the PPE front, even though the Coop has better products.
I suppose as it's Monday we shouldn't get too excited but perhaps some encouraging hints on new case numbers this evening. I'd love to see the decline in the number of those in hospital aged 75 and over, which I'm sure I saw last week, continuing which would be to this observer the first sign of the vaccination programme having an impact.
As to any further tightening of rules, the closure of construction sites would take a lot of people and vehicles off the transport system.
The more contentious issue will be the enforcement of mask-wearing regulations in shops. In East Ham, unlike some parts of rural Hampshire, I'd day mask wearing falls into three categories. One third don't wear them at all, one third wear them over the nose all the time and another third wear them at half mast outside shops and hitch them up to cover the nose when in shops so I suppose that puts mask wearing in shops at 67% rather than 99% reported elsewhere.
I can imagine my local supermarkets enforcing the mask wearing rules but will the corner shops or the other smaller stores who would risk losing business? We also see little or no adherence to social distancing at most shops (not all) and again you sense the bottom line is overriding the public health message.
Health vs Wealth - it's been the central question of public policy since the middle of March last year.
Both the teacher and the book were pretty rubbish, so bad that the memory stuck.
After vaccination, flu would presumably be the bigger risk.
The point I am trying to make is that -- because of the age profile of serious victims of the disease -- the sacrifice has been mainly for the benefit of the old.
And that is only OK if it starts a rebalancing of the intergenerational unfairness of our politics.
The young deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifice.
UP AGAINST THE WALL REDNECK MOTHER
by Ray Wylie Hubbard, made famous by Jerry Jeff Walker
He was born in Oklahoma
And his wife's name is Betty Lou Thelma Liz
He's not responsible for what he's doing
His mother made him what he is
And it's up against the wall, redneck mother
Mother who has raised her son so well
He's thirty four and drinkin' in a honky tonk
Just kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Sure does like his Falstaff beer
He likes to chase it down with that Wild Turkey liquor
He drives a '57 GMC pickup truck
Got a gun rack
And a "Goat Ropers Needs Love Too" sticker
And it's up against the wall, redneck mother
Mother who has raised her son so well
He's thirty four drinkin' in a honky tonk
Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Ah play it for mama
M is for the mud flaps she gave me for my pickup truck
O is for the oil I put on my hair
T is for T-Bird
H is for Haggard
E is for Eggs
And R is for Redneck
Up against the wall, redneck mother
Mother who has raised her son so well
He's thirty four and drinkin' in a honky tonk
Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
Yeah and it's up against the wall, redneck mother
Mother who has raised her son so well
He's thirty four drinkin' in a honky tonk
Kickin' hippies' asses and raisin' hell
What's that spell, let's go get Oklahoma USA
addendum - Ray Wylie Hubbard is a native of the Sooner State, among other accomplishments.
And based on my own observations, can attest that goat ropers really do need love too . . .
https://twitter.com/ParkerMolloy/status/1348701619257536518
Hence why herd immunity matters. Why people shouldn't be antivax morons.
However, I fear that state or every day compulsion only makes the number of antivax morons more likely to rise.
It also just feels like a non starter. Biz has not been trying to stop custom throughout. I don't think they'd be likely to start AFTER we're back to normal
And so it became classic hive maintenance, how we all turned upon the easily brainwashed and removed them all from the equation.
Good to leave it on a positive note.
Many people have seen their lives change very little. Some are leading better lives. Others have been absolutely hammered.
The impact is very, very uneven.
I wouldn`t oppose a higher income tax rate regime for the over 65s.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IPYmT2S1yJ8
Which perhaps implies a higher rate than the suggested 70%.
Though it will be lower in certain areas - I am tempted to suggest around Crawley and Glastonbury.
Cost to buy in Asda? About £5. Cost to HMG from Chartwells? £30
https://twitter.com/RoadsideMum/status/1348646428084760576
In addition of course it also works in the other direction. If there are two unvaccinated dudes there, they each run an increased risk of catching the lurgi and spreading it to their circle.
(Of course this assumes that, as is thought likely but is not yet proven, the vaccine does protect against becoming infectious).
https://twitter.com/DerbysPolice/status/1348691187130114050
Yes, Chief Constable .. the way to avoid apologising is not to fine people for things that aren't offences in the first place.
Did PBers pick up on the cancellation of his book contract re: his weighty tome on the Evils of Big Tech, thus depriving him of a political boost for 2024 as well as a profit center for the here and now.
When John Freaking Danforth says giving you a leg up the greasy pool was the "worst decision of my life" that AIN'T just whistling Dixie. It's a sign the wheels are falling off.
What we have here is an established process and price being trashed by the imposition of red tape and costs that were not there before. "We would have zero trade elsewhere" reveals your true lack of basic understanding. Its not elsewhere we are talking about. Its companies in the UK trading with EU punters and vice versa. For these transactions the cost and faff has just shot through the roof. Cheaper less faffy alternatives suddenly exist and why should EU punters put up with our crap when then can buy from someone else?
You do talk such utter bollocks with such sneering arrogance.
Very trad school.
Then I went to totally apolitical Imperial.
Then Deloittes and ACA.
Then the full monty City.
But despite this reactionary brainwashing I am ok. I can think about high taxes and white privilege without going into a tizz.
Lean Left
Loosely Liberal
Largely Libertarian
Yes that can be disruptive - I always acknowledged that and have never denied that.
Yes some trade may cease or become unprofitable that wasn't unprofitable before - sucks but it is what it is.
So what are you objecting to precisely from my arguments? Yes I acknowledge that there will be disruption. Yes I acknowledge the costs. Those were debated in 2016 to death.
If you wanted to remain in the Single Market and Customs Union you should have voted Remain. Sorry but that too is what it is.
Disruption is what was voted for. Life changes. Get on with it and move on.
Critics say that if cash were issued instead of product, parents would just spend it on booze and fags. Well I reckon I could get twice as much food, 20 Sovereign and 2 X 2 litres of White Lightening for £30!
GOD REST HIS SOUL
by Greg Allman
A man lay dying in the streets
A thousand people fell down on their knees
Any other day he would have been...
Preaching
Reaching all the people there
Oh Lord Lord
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw
I say God rest his soul
The Memphis battle ground was red
Cause blood came pouring from his head
Women and children fallin' down
Crying
For the man they loved so well
Oh Lord Lord
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw
I say God rest his soul
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw
I say God rest his soul
The morning sun will rise again
With all the patience growing thin
What we gonna do when war is come. and we're
Dying
Dying for the cause I know
But Lord knows I can't change what I saw
Say God rest his soul
FSM does not usually cost £6 per day.
I suspect the cost of this provision is not far away from FSM provision. Its pennies given the scale of canteens.
The problem is prior profligacy, not current austerity. Why on earth were they giving £30 vouchers previously?
In contrast Morrisons does this subscription box for just under £30, including delivery costs: https://www.morrisons.com/food-boxes/box/5-meals-to-feed-a-family-of-4-subscription-box
1. Immediately embark upon lengthy
2. Quickly conduct short trial; keeping speeches & etc to bare minimum, in fact giving bulk of time (week at very most) to defendant.
3. Defer trial pending joint congressional investigation by joint select committee, which will NOT impede President Biden's legislative agenda, confirmations AND above all COVID vaccinations and ongoing COVID crisis.
IF the votes are there to convict right now, then my preference is Door #2. Otherwise, #3
If that were meant to provide eg the school meals of one person then it absolutely should. There is enough there to provide the meals for somebody.
If the Council has ordered a food bag costing a fiver then this is more like it. Who knows?
We had a referendum, people made the argument to stay in the Single Market - and lost that argument. You voted against Remaining in the EU. Get over it.
Time to move on. Costs will be incurred in some areas, that is the price we pay for Brexit. I don't deny it. Why do you object to me not denying it?
Everyone is suffering disruption to their lives to a greater or lesser extent and in different ways and we are all going to be paying for it for many years.
If it was simply about protecting the elderly the government could have legislated to keep them completely locked-down and let everyone else get on with it. However that is only a part of the problem which is precisely why no government I can see anywhere has gone up that route. There are no easy solutions to dealing with a pandemic.
I am no supporter of this Government but it seems to me that they are already compensating those who are suffering most as best they can with the furlough scheme and other initiatives.
I simply don't buy the notion that is all about the young making huge sacrifices for the old. It's just sowing division
Other images of similarly scant parcels supplied by similar providers to other LEAs.