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.
The vast majority of my teachers at secondary school were very actively and vocally left wing. Those that weren't stayed very quiet. This was in the late 70s early 80s. Obviously their activism came to the fore more after 1979.
Boy, these guy know how to hurt a Republican AND a Congressman where it REALLY hurts!
BTW, some PBers may remember that Barry Goldwater's 1964 running mate for Vice President, William B. Miller once starred in a famous TV ad for American Express:
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?
Its you coming on here saying that it isn't a problem for business when business is providing details of why it is a problem.
It reminds me of the Bedroom Tax. Tories would come on, talk about fairness and say "all we're saying is that if you refuse to downsize you should pay". That there were examples up and down the country of no smaller accommodation being available didn't bother these zealots.
It may not bother you with all your massive business experience. But for newbies like Make UK its a problem that can't be fixed by sneering.
Already at 200,000/day, and that's without any of the mass vaccination sites. Perhaps Zahawi is owed an apology by some who predicted disaster?
I suppose if only 75% choose to take up the vaccine, achieving the "target" will be a shade easier. Vaccinating 18 million will be quicker than vaccinating 24 million - the Government will be able to announce "job done" - its supporters will trumpet this achievement to the skies in the hope of achieving some short-term political advantage.
6 million unvaccinated elderly people will still be out there helping to keep the case numbers up.
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.
BREAKING: On a call moments ago, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced that the House will meet Wednesday to vote on impeaching President Trump, sources on the call tell CNN.
Tomorrow, the House will vote at night on the measure offered by Rep. Raskin to push Donald Trump out via the 25th Amendment.
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.
There’s a class dimension too. Not in the way you're expressing things - loss of prospects and fun vs lives saved - but in a different way.
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
Agreed. The complicating factor being, of course, Republican votes.
Thank god the Democrats have a bare majority otherwise nothing would get done.
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.
Stocky, if your friend hasn't mentioned the Rothchild's yet there is still hope.
Someone very close to me is in this conspiracy camp and indeed Bill Gates has got a prominent mention. Tracking and control apparently through nano-techonology in the vaccine is one idea. What really entertained though was asking them exactly how small the battery was that powered the injected tracking device.
When I asked them for what signs i should look for in an elderly parent that Bill Gates was controlling them that I was met by the gritted teeth smile that only a devotee under scrutiny can have. Even poor video quality could not disguise the face. 'Will my mother start asking for an X Box? Office 365?' The response after a long pause at the other end of the line was 'oh its about the dangers to health of untested vaccines'.
There are legitimate questions over the accuracy of some of the tests, over the counting methodologies over death tolls & so on and how much experts & politicians are carrying out informed versus knee jerk actions
What will help shortly is out of the millions of doses, how many people have had a reaction, how many have been hospitalised? As the weeks go on we will hear a few stories no doubt blown up like crazy but if it isn't many then its going to help no end.
There is something, however, about the Astra Zeneca vaccine that concerns a bit, given that its that one that really is the UK's hope for vaccinating the masses. What's the problem with the rest of the world in approving it? Is there still a level of clinical doubt about its efficacy? Is it politics, a demand for levels of performance that may it cant achieve even though it can do a job? I read today the Cypriot PM suggesting the EU had been banking on it yet it hasn't been approved.
Already at 200,000/day, and that's without any of the mass vaccination sites. Perhaps Zahawi is owed an apology by some who predicted disaster?
I suppose if only 75% choose to take up the vaccine, achieving the "target" will be a shade easier. Vaccinating 18 million will be quicker than vaccinating 24 million - the Government will be able to announce "job done" - its supporters will trumpet this achievement to the skies in the hope of achieving some short-term political advantage.
6 million unvaccinated elderly people will still be out there helping to keep the case numbers up.
The vaccine target was given as a number of people, so there is little wiggle room there.
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
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.
The implied R from that is something like 0.9, which is a good achievement given the new variant all over the country. The issue is that it's too slow to come to the aid of the NHS, even at 0.9 it means another 5-6m people are yet to enter the funnel and that's around another 40-50k deaths baked in.
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
Already at 200,000/day, and that's without any of the mass vaccination sites. Perhaps Zahawi is owed an apology by some who predicted disaster?
I suppose if only 75% choose to take up the vaccine, achieving the "target" will be a shade easier. Vaccinating 18 million will be quicker than vaccinating 24 million - the Government will be able to announce "job done" - its supporters will trumpet this achievement to the skies in the hope of achieving some short-term political advantage.
6 million unvaccinated elderly people will still be out there helping to keep the case numbers up.
Where's that 75% figure coming from? Sounds made up.
It doesn't cost £30. However the bill to the taxpayer is £30.
As I say, outrageous if true. Could it be fake news?
Here's my theory built from different elements: 1. Big name foodservice companies have headline walk-in prices that are outrageous. Like more than it costs in Tesco bonkers when they are selling it someone who then needs to add their own profit margin. These always get reduced significantly in the contract negotiation 2. Government negotiators are notoriously shit (ask me about train procurement scandals). Someone is tasked with "feed hungry kids". Not someone senior as it isn't a government priority (they did everything they could NOT to feed hungry kids, remember). 3. Junior bod contacts the big names. There is a price list. Negotiation lasts 5 milliseconds. £30 doesn't go a long way at daft go away prices. 4. Chartwells happy to supply products at the contracted price knowing that any blame will go to the government. Kerching. 5. That Compass Group's recently departed Chairman told people to vote Tory won't have done any harm in ensuring Compass keep on the list of approved suppliers
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?
Its you coming on here saying that it isn't a problem for business when business is providing details of why it is a problem.
It reminds me of the Bedroom Tax. Tories would come on, talk about fairness and say "all we're saying is that if you refuse to downsize you should pay". That there were examples up and down the country of no smaller accommodation being available didn't bother these zealots.
It may not bother you with all your massive business experience. But for newbies like Make UK its a problem that can't be fixed by sneering.
When did I say it isn't a problem for business? Care to quote me saying that?
I have always acknowledged that there will be disruption. I have always acknowledged there is a price to pay. I have always said that some trade may no longer occur. I have always acknowledged some previously profitable companies might go out of business.
Shit happens. I don't deny it. That was the price for Brexit that was debated in the Referendum. That is why I used to support Remain and was torn in the Referendum, I considered voting Remain on the basis of this. But the debate happened and was settled - both internally within my own opinion and nationwide in favour of Leaving. Despite these costs.
I have accepted the fact the piper needs to be paid with this, I do not deny it. If you didn't want this you should have voted Remain, decisions have consequences.
It doesn't cost £30. However the bill to the taxpayer is £30.
Do you have a source for that?
Its on the tweet. Chartwells-supplied food for 2 weeks Free School Meals feeding. The government contracts this at £3 a day hence £30.
Other images of similarly scant parcels supplied by similar providers to other LEAs.
A train of thoughts...
1 This looks like a "We've been told to deliver something, but we don't really want to, so if we make it rubbish, we won't be asked in Week 3" delivery.
2 And to be fair to Chartwells, why should they be any good at this? I imagine the supply lines for catering packs of food (their normal biz) are very different to those needed to make food parcels. Wasn't the issue with flour in Proper Lockdown a shortage of small bags, rather than a shortage of flour?
3 Having said that, this is pretty insulting to families that need it.
4 The sensible thing was always vouchers spendable at whatever the local food shops were. The Spring 2020 scheme wasn't perfect (covered M&S, missed at least one of Aldi/Lidl) but it was better than this.
5 In fact, one wonders if more government spending will end up directed to booze'n'worse under this scheme (one assumes that Chartwell's profits end up in someone's bank account) than the previous one.
6 In any case, if Ben Bradley seeks his memorial, he only has to look...
It doesn't cost £30. However the bill to the taxpayer is £30.
As I say, outrageous if true. Could it be fake news?
Here's my theory built from different elements: 1. Big name foodservice companies have headline walk-in prices that are outrageous. Like more than it costs in Tesco bonkers when they are selling it someone who then needs to add their own profit margin. These always get reduced significantly in the contract negotiation 2. Government negotiators are notoriously shit (ask me about train procurement scandals). Someone is tasked with "feed hungry kids". Not someone senior as it isn't a government priority (they did everything they could NOT to feed hungry kids, remember). 3. Junior bod contacts the big names. There is a price list. Negotiation lasts 5 milliseconds. £30 doesn't go a long way at daft go away prices. 4. Chartwells happy to supply products at the contracted price knowing that any blame will go to the government. Kerching. 5. That Compass Group's recently departed Chairman told people to vote Tory won't have done any harm in ensuring Compass keep on the list of approved suppliers
What evidence do you have this costs £30 per head? A source or citation for that, because none have been provided so far.
Maybe the Council only offered to pay a five per head. Who knows?
That a £30 voucher was previously temporarily offered does not mean that this service was booked in at £30 per head. Maybe the Council was looking to cut costs or only absorb the price they would have paid previously?
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
I can't wait to find out which exciting new markets the UK logistics industry can supply. As the UK stops being a viable hub for UK/IRL/northern Europe logistics all those sheds in the Golden Triangle are perfectly located to suppl (checks list of countries with a trade deal) Honduras or Vietnam.
Or - radical idea - how about we do a deal with the UK that doesn't cripple UK businesses? It won't cripple EU businesses - they can easily find new customers inside the EU. Send the truck to Germany instead of Britain. Harder for UK businesses built and configured for sales to Germany to suddenly win the same volume and value of business in Ivory Coast.
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.
The implied R from that is something like 0.9, which is a good achievement given the new variant all over the country. The issue is that it's too slow to come to the aid of the NHS, even at 0.9 it means another 5-6m people are yet to enter the funnel and that's around another 40-50k deaths baked in.
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
The plan, here at least, is to move public vaccination out of acute settings as soon as possible. Staff will probably still get their jabs at work if they are in , otherwise its apparently turn up at the local leisure centre.
The major growth area, again here at least, was the schools, secondary school kids in particular. It was those they should have put on hiatus in earlier December. We are, however, where we are and just have to wait until measures take effect. And they will take effect.
Stocky, if your friend hasn't mentioned the Rothchild's yet there is still hope.
Someone very close to me is in this conspiracy camp and indeed Bill Gates has got a prominent mention. Tracking and control apparently through nano-techonology in the vaccine is one idea. What really entertained though was asking them exactly how small the battery was that powered the injected tracking device.
When I asked them for what signs i should look for in an elderly parent that Bill Gates was controlling them that I was met by the gritted teeth smile that only a devotee under scrutiny can have. Even poor video quality could not disguise the face. 'Will my mother start asking for an X Box? Office 365?' The response after a long pause at the other end of the line was 'oh its about the dangers to health of untested vaccines'.
There are legitimate questions over the accuracy of some of the tests, over the counting methodologies over death tolls & so on and how much experts & politicians are carrying out informed versus knee jerk actions
What will help shortly is out of the millions of doses, how many people have had a reaction, how many have been hospitalised? As the weeks go on we will hear a few stories no doubt blown up like crazy but if it isn't many then its going to help no end.
There is something, however, about the Astra Zeneca vaccine that concerns a bit, given that its that one that really is the UK's hope for vaccinating the masses. What's the problem with the rest of the world in approving it? Is there still a level of clinical doubt about its efficacy? Is it politics, a demand for levels of performance that may it cant achieve even though it can do a job? I read today the Cypriot PM suggesting the EU had been banking on it yet it hasn't been approved.
They hadn't read up on the nano-technology used in the injection then, because clearly the battery is also made using nano-technology. I mean that is obvious surely.
Speaking of teachers, I've had good, occasionally great teachers from divergent political viewpoints. Best were opinionated but (reasonably) open-minded, certainly in entertaining my fool notions. Also on the quirky side (and not just with politics).
For example, a staunch, a Bob Taft Republican I had in high school (it was a while ago) was also a member of the American Federation of Teachers local, instead of the more conservative (at that time) American Education Association which represented the bulk of teachers. "If I'm gonna belong to a goddamn union, I'm gonna belong to a REAL union."
And a professor of somewhat conservative view who was a self-declared Texas Monarchist. A political philosophy that he did NOT choose to elaborate, and which is unique in my experience. (Though IF you told me there was a nest of Lone Star royalists located in the Big Thicket would NOT be surprised.)
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
I can't wait to find out which exciting new markets the UK logistics industry can supply. As the UK stops being a viable hub for UK/IRL/northern Europe logistics all those sheds in the Golden Triangle are perfectly located to suppl (checks list of countries with a trade deal) Honduras or Vietnam.
Or - radical idea - how about we do a deal with the UK that doesn't cripple UK businesses? It won't cripple EU businesses - they can easily find new customers inside the EU. Send the truck to Germany instead of Britain. Harder for UK businesses built and configured for sales to Germany to suddenly win the same volume and value of business in Ivory Coast.
We had a deal which kept us in the Single Market and Customs Union.
A majority of people voted to leave it. You voted to leave it.
Decisions have consequences. You were warned. 🤷🏻♂️
Stocky, if your friend hasn't mentioned the Rothchild's yet there is still hope.
Someone very close to me is in this conspiracy camp and indeed Bill Gates has got a prominent mention. Tracking and control apparently through nano-techonology in the vaccine is one idea. What really entertained though was asking them exactly how small the battery was that powered the injected tracking device.
When I asked them for what signs i should look for in an elderly parent that Bill Gates was controlling them that I was met by the gritted teeth smile that only a devotee under scrutiny can have. Even poor video quality could not disguise the face. 'Will my mother start asking for an X Box? Office 365?' The response after a long pause at the other end of the line was 'oh its about the dangers to health of untested vaccines'.
There are legitimate questions over the accuracy of some of the tests, over the counting methodologies over death tolls & so on and how much experts & politicians are carrying out informed versus knee jerk actions
What will help shortly is out of the millions of doses, how many people have had a reaction, how many have been hospitalised? As the weeks go on we will hear a few stories no doubt blown up like crazy but if it isn't many then its going to help no end.
There is something, however, about the Astra Zeneca vaccine that concerns a bit, given that its that one that really is the UK's hope for vaccinating the masses. What's the problem with the rest of the world in approving it? Is there still a level of clinical doubt about its efficacy? Is it politics, a demand for levels of performance that may it cant achieve even though it can do a job? I read today the Cypriot PM suggesting the EU had been banking on it yet it hasn't been approved.
They hadn't read up on the nano-technology used in the injection then, because clearly the battery is also made using nano-technology. I mean that is obvious surely.
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.
And that's precisely why I made the comparison in the way I did, to avoid such distortions. I am comparing figures reported in public today Mon 11th with those reported in public on Mon 4th. i.e. the figure each day coming into the calculation of the 7 day rolling average with that falling out. Yes, Monday's figure is always depressed compared to other days, but you can still compare this Monday's 46,169 with last Monday's 58,784. And likewise compare Sun with Sun, Sat with Sat, etc etc.
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
I don't know your personal views on the subjects, since they haven't been discussed lately. But I find that the people who go apoplectic at the thought of 1p on fuel duty or 1% on council tax are the most blase about the disruption caused by Brexit. I have this vain hope that the COVID crisis might bring back a sense of perspective.
It doesn't cost £30. However the bill to the taxpayer is £30.
As I say, outrageous if true. Could it be fake news?
Here's my theory built from different elements: 1. Big name foodservice companies have headline walk-in prices that are outrageous. Like more than it costs in Tesco bonkers when they are selling it someone who then needs to add their own profit margin. These always get reduced significantly in the contract negotiation 2. Government negotiators are notoriously shit (ask me about train procurement scandals). Someone is tasked with "feed hungry kids". Not someone senior as it isn't a government priority (they did everything they could NOT to feed hungry kids, remember). 3. Junior bod contacts the big names. There is a price list. Negotiation lasts 5 milliseconds. £30 doesn't go a long way at daft go away prices. 4. Chartwells happy to supply products at the contracted price knowing that any blame will go to the government. Kerching. 5. That Compass Group's recently departed Chairman told people to vote Tory won't have done any harm in ensuring Compass keep on the list of approved suppliers
What evidence do you have this costs £30 per head? A source or citation for that, because none have been provided so far.
Maybe the Council only offered to pay a five per head. Who knows?
That a £30 voucher was previously temporarily offered does not mean that this service was booked in at £30 per head. Maybe the Council was looking to cut costs or only absorb the price they would have paid previously?
If you recall your Tory friends objected to the previous system of £3 a day in vouchers as parents were spending it on crack and hookers. Instead the cash is going to provide food parcels.
If you are suggesting your government have pulled a fast one and promised to continue free school meals but have collapsed the cash available, I am listening. Proving you can provide evidence of course.
Though it says Present above. Weird. Maybe a hack?
Be good if it is legitimate. Would have to be a resignation though, even invoking the 25th doesn't make it so. Seems a weird way to announce it though if true.
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
Of course, there are individuals who have suffered from COVID and who have died in all age groups. And there are individuals who have lost their livelihoods in all age groups.
Overall, though, the people who did fine -- financially speaking -- during COVID were primarily already affluent (which in our society correlates strongly with increasing age).
And the sacrifices were to save the lives of people. This may be an unpalatable thing to say, but the deleterious effects of COVID correlate strongly with increasing age.
The effect of these correlations means that the sacrifice has been mainly by the young for the elderly. Not exclusively, sure, but I think it is a reasonable, broad-brush statement of the truth.
I don't particularly want to focus on University students, as my argument is broader. But, they do provide a specific & glaring example.
How on earth can it be right that students are being charged rent on properties in their University towns to which they cannot even get access ? There should not be an argument here -- this money should be returned to them forthwith (whether the landlord is private or the University).
Young people are taking out loans for accommodation, which they cannot even use because they are locked down primarily for the benefit of the old !!! And those self-same old people got full student grants when they were young !!!
Sorry -- this is not sowing discord where there is none.
The discord was already there, and the pandemic has made it much worse.
Stocky, if your friend hasn't mentioned the Rothchild's yet there is still hope.
Someone very close to me is in this conspiracy camp and indeed Bill Gates has got a prominent mention. Tracking and control apparently through nano-techonology in the vaccine is one idea. What really entertained though was asking them exactly how small the battery was that powered the injected tracking device.
When I asked them for what signs i should look for in an elderly parent that Bill Gates was controlling them that I was met by the gritted teeth smile that only a devotee under scrutiny can have. Even poor video quality could not disguise the face. 'Will my mother start asking for an X Box? Office 365?' The response after a long pause at the other end of the line was 'oh its about the dangers to health of untested vaccines'.
There are legitimate questions over the accuracy of some of the tests, over the counting methodologies over death tolls & so on and how much experts & politicians are carrying out informed versus knee jerk actions
What will help shortly is out of the millions of doses, how many people have had a reaction, how many have been hospitalised? As the weeks go on we will hear a few stories no doubt blown up like crazy but if it isn't many then its going to help no end.
There is something, however, about the Astra Zeneca vaccine that concerns a bit, given that its that one that really is the UK's hope for vaccinating the masses. What's the problem with the rest of the world in approving it? Is there still a level of clinical doubt about its efficacy? Is it politics, a demand for levels of performance that may it cant achieve even though it can do a job? I read today the Cypriot PM suggesting the EU had been banking on it yet it hasn't been approved.
They hadn't read up on the nano-technology used in the injection then, because clearly the battery is also made using nano-technology. I mean that is obvious surely.
Like an AAAAAA size?
That made me laugh a lot. Don't think you have enough 'A's though.
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.
The implied R from that is something like 0.9, which is a good achievement given the new variant all over the country. The issue is that it's too slow to come to the aid of the NHS, even at 0.9 it means another 5-6m people are yet to enter the funnel and that's around another 40-50k deaths baked in.
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
The plan, here at least, is to move public vaccination out of acute settings as soon as possible. Staff will probably still get their jabs at work if they are in , otherwise its apparently turn up at the local leisure centre.
The major growth area, again here at least, was the schools, secondary school kids in particular. It was those they should have put on hiatus in earlier December. We are, however, where we are and just have to wait until measures take effect. And they will take effect.
I'm really not sure why the NHS (as in the hospitals service part) are involved in the vaccination programme at all. It seems wholly bizarre.
Though it says Present above. Weird. Maybe a hack?
Be good if it is legitimate. Would have to be a resignation though, even invoking the 25th doesn't make it so. Seems a weird way to announce it though if true.
The Secretary of State is the keeper of the Great Seal of the United States, so any Presidential resignations go through the State Department, see Nixon's resignation.
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
I can't wait to find out which exciting new markets the UK logistics industry can supply. As the UK stops being a viable hub for UK/IRL/northern Europe logistics all those sheds in the Golden Triangle are perfectly located to suppl (checks list of countries with a trade deal) Honduras or Vietnam.
Or - radical idea - how about we do a deal with the UK that doesn't cripple UK businesses? It won't cripple EU businesses - they can easily find new customers inside the EU. Send the truck to Germany instead of Britain. Harder for UK businesses built and configured for sales to Germany to suddenly win the same volume and value of business in Ivory Coast.
We had a deal which kept us in the Single Market and Customs Union.
A majority of people voted to leave it. You voted to leave it.
Decisions have consequences. You were warned. 🤷🏻♂️
A compelling argument. "You voted to leave the EU. We chose to interpret that as leaving the EU the Single Market and the Customs Union. We told you that not to do so would fail to deliver on the major improvements we promised. You voted for us. So now we have negotiated a deal which fucks you and this country hard. We didn't have to. We chose to. Because you voted for it. Can we could on your support at the next election?"
Actually, have you and HYUFD ever been seen in the same room?
It doesn't cost £30. However the bill to the taxpayer is £30.
As I say, outrageous if true. Could it be fake news?
Here's my theory built from different elements: 1. Big name foodservice companies have headline walk-in prices that are outrageous. Like more than it costs in Tesco bonkers when they are selling it someone who then needs to add their own profit margin. These always get reduced significantly in the contract negotiation 2. Government negotiators are notoriously shit (ask me about train procurement scandals). Someone is tasked with "feed hungry kids". Not someone senior as it isn't a government priority (they did everything they could NOT to feed hungry kids, remember). 3. Junior bod contacts the big names. There is a price list. Negotiation lasts 5 milliseconds. £30 doesn't go a long way at daft go away prices. 4. Chartwells happy to supply products at the contracted price knowing that any blame will go to the government. Kerching. 5. That Compass Group's recently departed Chairman told people to vote Tory won't have done any harm in ensuring Compass keep on the list of approved suppliers
What evidence do you have this costs £30 per head? A source or citation for that, because none have been provided so far.
Maybe the Council only offered to pay a five per head. Who knows?
That a £30 voucher was previously temporarily offered does not mean that this service was booked in at £30 per head. Maybe the Council was looking to cut costs or only absorb the price they would have paid previously?
If you recall your Tory friends objected to the previous system of £3 a day in vouchers as parents were spending it on crack and hookers. Instead the cash is going to provide food parcels.
If you are suggesting your government have pulled a fast one and promised to continue free school meals but have collapsed the cash available, I am listening. Proving you can provide evidence of course.
I don't have evidence. I am asking a question. Who knows what the current scheme costs, the idea was to provide food not £x of food per day.
And you keep saying Tory, but as far as I know this is being organised by Councils and not Tories. How do you know which Council this is? Why do you assume its being provided by a Tory Council (or even that it isn't fake Twitter nonsense)?
This is what someone else in reply said they have received - text but it paints a very different picture!
Security at Washington State capitol complex at Olympia is already very tight, in part due to well- (and self-) publicized occupation of the grounds including front entrance to Governor's mansion by small but highly-charged (and -armed) Trumpskyites.
My sources say that most legislators are less worried by the threat of a min-Putsch, than by the risk of catch COVID from right-wing wing-nut Republican state senators and representatives. Whose ranks were thinned slightly by the 2022 elections out here, but still enough to be a public health risk.
Given that Democrats control both chambers of WA legislature, most business will be done virtually. AND would advise to members to acquire a N95 mask to where whenever they must be in the same indoor space as a anti-masking Putinist.
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.
The implied R from that is something like 0.9, which is a good achievement given the new variant all over the country. The issue is that it's too slow to come to the aid of the NHS, even at 0.9 it means another 5-6m people are yet to enter the funnel and that's around another 40-50k deaths baked in.
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
The plan, here at least, is to move public vaccination out of acute settings as soon as possible. Staff will probably still get their jabs at work if they are in , otherwise its apparently turn up at the local leisure centre.
The major growth area, again here at least, was the schools, secondary school kids in particular. It was those they should have put on hiatus in earlier December. We are, however, where we are and just have to wait until measures take effect. And they will take effect.
I'm really not sure why the NHS (as in the hospitals service part) are involved in the vaccination programme at all. It seems wholly bizarre.
Not sure either but based on what i know here, the mass of work is being done elsewhere. Its possible its just a good place for staff who are high on the priority list plus also a good starter location for some key publics.
Though it says Present above. Weird. Maybe a hack?
Be good if it is legitimate. Would have to be a resignation though, even invoking the 25th doesn't make it so. Seems a weird way to announce it though if true.
The Secretary of State is the keeper of the Great Seal of the United States, so any Presidential resignations go through the State Department, see Nixon's resignation.
Oh I get that. But I wouldn't expect the State Department to announce it via a webpage like that rather than a press release first. Maybe they would but it seems odd.
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.
The vast majority of my teachers at secondary school were very actively and vocally left wing. Those that weren't stayed very quiet. This was in the late 70s early 80s. Obviously their activism came to the fore more after 1979.
My best teacher was my primary school science teacher, who I believe ended up the Head at St. Paul’s. At my next school three of the masters later served 8-10 stretches for sex offences.
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
Of course, there are individuals who have suffered from COVID and who have died in all age groups. And there are individuals who have lost their livelihoods in all age groups.
Overall, though, the people who did fine -- financially speaking -- during COVID were primarily already affluent (which in our society correlates strongly with increasing age).
And the sacrifices were to save the lives of people. This may be an unpalatable thing to say, but the deleterious effects of COVID correlate strongly with increasing age.
The effect of these correlations means that the sacrifice has been mainly by the young for the elderly. Not exclusively, sure, but I think it is a reasonable, broad-brush statement of the truth.
I don't particularly want to focus on University students, as my argument is broader. But, they do provide a specific & glaring example.
How on earth can it be right that students are being charged rent on properties in their University towns to which they cannot even get access ? There should not be an argument here -- this money should be returned to them forthwith (whether the landlord is private or the University).
Young people are taking out loans for accommodation, which they cannot even use because they are locked down primarily for the benefit of the old !!! And those self-same old people got full student grants when they were young !!!
Sorry -- this is not sowing discord where there is none.
The discord was already there, and the pandemic has made it much worse.
Scottish students had legislation passed back in the spring, I think, to mitigate that issue in student accommodation (inclouding purpose built commercial halls). But not in private rentals AFAIK. They can cancel at short notice.
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
I agree with him. But I agree slightly more with you.
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.
The implied R from that is something like 0.9, which is a good achievement given the new variant all over the country. The issue is that it's too slow to come to the aid of the NHS, even at 0.9 it means another 5-6m people are yet to enter the funnel and that's around another 40-50k deaths baked in.
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
The plan, here at least, is to move public vaccination out of acute settings as soon as possible. Staff will probably still get their jabs at work if they are in , otherwise its apparently turn up at the local leisure centre.
The major growth area, again here at least, was the schools, secondary school kids in particular. It was those they should have put on hiatus in earlier December. We are, however, where we are and just have to wait until measures take effect. And they will take effect.
I'm really not sure why the NHS (as in the hospitals service part) are involved in the vaccination programme at all. It seems wholly bizarre.
Not sure either but based on what i know here, the mass of work is being done elsewhere. Its possible its just a good place for staff who are high on the priority list plus also a good starter location for some key publics.
Yes, I can see it would be a good idea to vaccinate NHS staff 'in situ' - apart from that, keep people the f**k away, and don't waste the time of skilled hospital nurses (or God forbid Doctors) sticking repeated jabs into repeated arms several hundred times a day.
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.
No empty shelves are not a new equilibrium. That is disruption at most. 🙄 Tesco would either find a way to refill the shelves, potentially with different products or at different prices to before - or they might close the store if it is no longer profitable. That sort of change happens on a daily basis all over the economy.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
The basic economic concept of supply and demand could apply to your first paragraph. High demand, low supply, equals price inflation. And you didn't tell me about these store closures prior to the EU referendum.
I am aware of economic equilibrium and I explained to you yesterday why it doesn't work in your analysis. I can't be bothered to repeat myself, if you so wish look up my post.
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
Absolutely. And how does “it’s all for the old” square with most of those in London’s overloaded ICUs being under 60, with 90% of them having been at work beforehand?
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.
The vast majority of my teachers at secondary school were very actively and vocally left wing. Those that weren't stayed very quiet. This was in the late 70s early 80s. Obviously their activism came to the fore more after 1979.
I didn't clock at the time that my 6th Form College was particularly left wing, but on reflection, the books we read in English were The Handmaids Tale, Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit, The Fat Black Womans Poems, Sons and Lovers and Pride and Prejudice, so the teachers were probably a bit that way inclined. When I couldnt think of a theme or a writer to do my big project about, they chose for me and I got lumbered with a Fay Weldon trilogy!
I had meant to do English Language, but got mixed up at the selection day and did Eng lit instead
"A ban on people in England walking or exercising with anyone from outside their household is looking increasingly likely, with sources telling the Guardian it is “under active consideration’’ and “could be introduced imminently”"
That's it. That's my social life gone. They want me to be entirely alone until March
I see we are back on to ludicrous rules-shaming, this time with Boris, who apparently broke rules by going on a bike ride.
I mean, FFS, who cares? The amount of energy that has been wasted on tea-drinking blondes, bike-riding premiers, and weak-bladdered newswomen is beyond ridiculous. One day, when we look back on all this, history will read as farce.
On topic, I do take a slightly Darwinian view at this point, but that may change later in the year. If someone in a high risk group chooses not to take up the offer to book an appointment, that's their stupidly and mainly (for now) their problem. Just move on to the next in line.
I appreciate it isn't entirely the case that it's the person's own look-out as a vulnerable person is more likely to require care so it's better for the NHS if an 85 year old is jabbed earlier in preference to a 70 year old. However, it does seem to me it's all about vaccines in arms at this point and, if 10-20% don't want to do it, don't waste resource on them.
That balance does change as we move towards full vaccination and the hold-outs are the long tail causing a problem. But it feels like a problem for Q4 rather than now.
On travel and so on, I am a bit surprised some kind of certificate isn't being issued as a matter of course. It would not shock me if other countries were asking for proof of vaccination later in the year, and it seems to make sense to pre-empt that.
I thought people were getting an official card with date of first vaccination on it?
Comments
BTW, some PBers may remember that Barry Goldwater's 1964 running mate for Vice President, William B. Miller once starred in a famous TV ad for American Express:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oaYMg41pe0
It reminds me of the Bedroom Tax. Tories would come on, talk about fairness and say "all we're saying is that if you refuse to downsize you should pay". That there were examples up and down the country of no smaller accommodation being available didn't bother these zealots.
It may not bother you with all your massive business experience. But for newbies like Make UK its a problem that can't be fixed by sneering.
6 million unvaccinated elderly people will still be out there helping to keep the case numbers up.
Tomorrow, the House will vote at night on the measure offered by Rep. Raskin to push Donald Trump out via the 25th Amendment.
The complicating factor being, of course, Republican votes.
Thank god the Democrats have a bare majority otherwise nothing would get done.
Someone very close to me is in this conspiracy camp and indeed Bill Gates has got a prominent mention. Tracking and control apparently through nano-techonology in the vaccine is one idea. What really entertained though was asking them exactly how small the battery was that powered the injected tracking device.
When I asked them for what signs i should look for in an elderly parent that Bill Gates was controlling them that I was met by the gritted teeth smile that only a devotee under scrutiny can have. Even poor video quality could not disguise the face. 'Will my mother start asking for an X Box? Office 365?' The response after a long pause at the other end of the line was 'oh its about the dangers to health of untested vaccines'.
There are legitimate questions over the accuracy of some of the tests, over the counting methodologies over death tolls & so on and how much experts & politicians are carrying out informed versus knee jerk actions
What will help shortly is out of the millions of doses, how many people have had a reaction, how many have been hospitalised? As the weeks go on we will hear a few stories no doubt blown up like crazy but if it isn't many then its going to help no end.
There is something, however, about the Astra Zeneca vaccine that concerns a bit, given that its that one that really is the UK's hope for vaccinating the masses. What's the problem with the rest of the world in approving it? Is there still a level of clinical doubt about its efficacy? Is it politics, a demand for levels of performance that may it cant achieve even though it can do a job? I read today the Cypriot PM suggesting the EU had been banking on it yet it hasn't been approved.
An equilibrium is a very basic economic concept, I'm not sure what you need explaining about it? Long story short if a cost goes up then there will be less trade done etc etc etc - that is the new equilibrium when it comes to Europe, less trade with Europe where the costs have increased. What are you struggling to understand about that? 🤷🏻♂️
Sadly for the UK the vaccines have arrived 6 weeks too late. If they'd come 6 weeks earlier we'd already have done 15-20m by now and be looking at the other side of it all. Unfortunately they didn't and now we have a catastrophe on our hands because people just won't stay home and the government has decided that it's better to keep manufacturing, construction and takeaway restaurants open instead of spending £8-10bn to close them all for the 3-5 weeks it would take to bring the infection rate down rapidly.
Someone pointed out to me today that because NHS resources are stretched this could begin to impact hospital vaccination programmes and given well over half of our jabs are taking place in hospitals this could be really unhelpful.
1. Big name foodservice companies have headline walk-in prices that are outrageous. Like more than it costs in Tesco bonkers when they are selling it someone who then needs to add their own profit margin. These always get reduced significantly in the contract negotiation
2. Government negotiators are notoriously shit (ask me about train procurement scandals). Someone is tasked with "feed hungry kids". Not someone senior as it isn't a government priority (they did everything they could NOT to feed hungry kids, remember).
3. Junior bod contacts the big names. There is a price list. Negotiation lasts 5 milliseconds. £30 doesn't go a long way at daft go away prices.
4. Chartwells happy to supply products at the contracted price knowing that any blame will go to the government. Kerching.
5. That Compass Group's recently departed Chairman told people to vote Tory won't have done any harm in ensuring Compass keep on the list of approved suppliers
I have always acknowledged that there will be disruption.
I have always acknowledged there is a price to pay.
I have always said that some trade may no longer occur.
I have always acknowledged some previously profitable companies might go out of business.
Shit happens. I don't deny it. That was the price for Brexit that was debated in the Referendum. That is why I used to support Remain and was torn in the Referendum, I considered voting Remain on the basis of this. But the debate happened and was settled - both internally within my own opinion and nationwide in favour of Leaving. Despite these costs.
I have accepted the fact the piper needs to be paid with this, I do not deny it. If you didn't want this you should have voted Remain, decisions have consequences.
1 This looks like a "We've been told to deliver something, but we don't really want to, so if we make it rubbish, we won't be asked in Week 3" delivery.
2 And to be fair to Chartwells, why should they be any good at this? I imagine the supply lines for catering packs of food (their normal biz) are very different to those needed to make food parcels. Wasn't the issue with flour in Proper Lockdown a shortage of small bags, rather than a shortage of flour?
3 Having said that, this is pretty insulting to families that need it.
4 The sensible thing was always vouchers spendable at whatever the local food shops were. The Spring 2020 scheme wasn't perfect (covered M&S, missed at least one of Aldi/Lidl) but it was better than this.
5 In fact, one wonders if more government spending will end up directed to booze'n'worse under this scheme (one assumes that Chartwell's profits end up in someone's bank account) than the previous one.
6 In any case, if Ben Bradley seeks his memorial, he only has to look...
Maybe the Council only offered to pay a five per head. Who knows?
That a £30 voucher was previously temporarily offered does not mean that this service was booked in at £30 per head. Maybe the Council was looking to cut costs or only absorb the price they would have paid previously?
Or - radical idea - how about we do a deal with the UK that doesn't cripple UK businesses? It won't cripple EU businesses - they can easily find new customers inside the EU. Send the truck to Germany instead of Britain. Harder for UK businesses built and configured for sales to Germany to suddenly win the same volume and value of business in Ivory Coast.
The major growth area, again here at least, was the schools, secondary school kids in particular. It was those they should have put on hiatus in earlier December. We are, however, where we are and just have to wait until measures take effect. And they will take effect.
For example, a staunch, a Bob Taft Republican I had in high school (it was a while ago) was also a member of the American Federation of Teachers local, instead of the more conservative (at that time) American Education Association which represented the bulk of teachers. "If I'm gonna belong to a goddamn union, I'm gonna belong to a REAL union."
And a professor of somewhat conservative view who was a self-declared Texas Monarchist. A political philosophy that he did NOT choose to elaborate, and which is unique in my experience. (Though IF you told me there was a nest of Lone Star royalists located in the Big Thicket would NOT be surprised.)
A majority of people voted to leave it. You voted to leave it.
Decisions have consequences. You were warned. 🤷🏻♂️
But I find that the people who go apoplectic at the thought of 1p on fuel duty or 1% on council tax are the most blase about the disruption caused by Brexit.
I have this vain hope that the COVID crisis might bring back a sense of perspective.
If you are suggesting your government have pulled a fast one and promised to continue free school meals but have collapsed the cash available, I am listening. Proving you can provide evidence of course.
Be good if it is legitimate. Would have to be a resignation though, even invoking the 25th doesn't make it so. Seems a weird way to announce it though if true.
Overall, though, the people who did fine -- financially speaking -- during COVID were primarily already affluent (which in our society correlates strongly with increasing age).
And the sacrifices were to save the lives of people. This may be an unpalatable thing to say, but the deleterious effects of COVID correlate strongly with increasing age.
The effect of these correlations means that the sacrifice has been mainly by the young for the elderly. Not exclusively, sure, but I think it is a reasonable, broad-brush statement of the truth.
I don't particularly want to focus on University students, as my argument is broader. But, they do provide a specific & glaring example.
How on earth can it be right that students are being charged rent on properties in their University towns to which they cannot even get access ? There should not be an argument here -- this money should be returned to them forthwith (whether the landlord is private or the University).
Young people are taking out loans for accommodation, which they cannot even use because they are locked down primarily for the benefit of the old !!! And those self-same old people got full student grants when they were young !!!
Sorry -- this is not sowing discord where there is none.
The discord was already there, and the pandemic has made it much worse.
Good header Stocky and not a peep out of Mysticrose.
That must be a first......
Actually, have you and HYUFD ever been seen in the same room?
And you keep saying Tory, but as far as I know this is being organised by Councils and not Tories. How do you know which Council this is? Why do you assume its being provided by a Tory Council (or even that it isn't fake Twitter nonsense)?
This is what someone else in reply said they have received - text but it paints a very different picture!
https://twitter.com/trina1982t/status/1348705542613708801
My sources say that most legislators are less worried by the threat of a min-Putsch, than by the risk of catch COVID from right-wing wing-nut Republican state senators and representatives. Whose ranks were thinned slightly by the 2022 elections out here, but still enough to be a public health risk.
Given that Democrats control both chambers of WA legislature, most business will be done virtually. AND would advise to members to acquire a N95 mask to where whenever they must be in the same indoor space as a anti-masking Putinist.
NEW THREAD
At my next school three of the masters later served 8-10 stretches for sex offences.
I am aware of economic equilibrium and I explained to you yesterday why it doesn't work in your analysis. I can't be bothered to repeat myself, if you so wish look up my post.
I had meant to do English Language, but got mixed up at the selection day and did Eng lit instead
I mean, FFS, who cares? The amount of energy that has been wasted on tea-drinking blondes, bike-riding premiers, and weak-bladdered newswomen is beyond ridiculous. One day, when we look back on all this, history will read as farce.