Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

The big vaccine divide: The UK’s approach is politician led while the EU’s is run by its officers –

1567810

Comments

  • Options

    kle4 said:

    Well when there are shortages, we just won't be able to send as much to Scotland....
    Ridiculous even as a joke. Even when provoked, if seen that way, responses would be proportionate and not self defeating, such as punishing a part of our own country.

    We only ever do that unintentionally.
    That isn't what I meant....It is just a fact that if there are shortages, Scotland will get less, just like every other country / area of the UK.
    Yeah right, at least have the balls to own your 'humour'.
    Though I can see the rsi Cartman stuff may give you pause on that thing.
    No I was being serious, if Sturgeon announces these numbers and then it means we get less, that means less to Scotland. It is self defeating.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Quite true and I am sure in a few more days I will be praising him for some comment. But it is still worth pointing out when someone is well out of order and needs to think about what they have said in light of all the opprobrium coming in from all sides. Hence the reason I very specifically said 'the last few days'.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:
    Typical Cambridge.

    --AS
    Nah. Cambridge Union. Which even my posh friends thought was odd.
    Serious question - isn't the point of these debates to win 'the debate' and not necessarily to be right in what you are supporting. When we did debates at school the teachers would often find out first what our views were on a subject and then specifically get us to debate in favour of the other side. It was about being convincing through your debating skills, not about being right about the underlying issue. Is that not the case n these Oxford and Cambridge debates?

    You can tell I'm not an Oxbridge graduate. :)
    Not my scene (can you tell?) but I think that was the game. It's certainly a useful teaching and learning and thinking approach to try and argue the opposite case to what you think. We should try it here sometime.

    But my impression is that part of the game of Oxbridge Union debates is to win the argument, irrespective of its merits. Which is why it's *ahem* unfortunate that so many top Westminster pols come via those Unions...
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,429
    edited January 2021
    Cyclefree said:

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    Add me to the list of those thinking the EU's failure over vaccines and petulant behaviour are unacceptable.

    I am particularly angry about it because it means family members and friends are being put at risk unnecessarily.
    I don't think anyone could ever accuse you of suffering fools gladly, whereever they may be.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,426
    edited January 2021
    Disappointed that Newsnight just had a Wall Street supporter on the show to discuss the Robinhood controversy. Predictably he blamed the amateurs for spoiling everything.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    Dunno who that person was, but either he or she was deliberately misdiagnosing "real life antisemitism" in a fit of flouncy self-righteousness, or it was the real thing and was indeed tolerated in silence by everybody here minus one. In the latter case, how can you possibly bear to be here? Do you spend a lot of time on other websites which you perceive to be overtly antisemitic? Why?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It's exactly what Britain is doing.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kle4 said:

    RobD said:

    Reuters reckons Wall Street losses from short selling could be USD70bn....

    Wow, that's nuts!
    Its gets trickier,

    Its a matter of record from her disclosures that the US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has garnered millions in speaking engagements from Wall Street firms before her appointment. Perfectly legal of course, but some are caught up in this.....


    What is it about Wall Street firms and indeed big companies globally, that they like paying people to speak to them. I don't know who was paying for it, but Theresa May has made millions doing it apparently.
    They aren’t speeches

    Dinner with Yellen for your top 10 clients brings a lot of revenue
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 77,870
    edited January 2021
    BBC News said the UK vaccination programme is outstripping most of Europe....there is no most of about it.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,750
    dixiedean said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    They are Reddit posters investing to move the price because it’s “fun”
    Entirely the wrong sort to be manipulating the markets.
    Market manipulation is a crime. When professionals do it, they go to jail.

    When Reddit users do it, they make a tonne of money, and then the poor idiots who follow them lose all their money.

    The number of subscribers on r/WallStreetBets increased from 3m to 4m in one day this week. That's one million patsies who are going to engage in buying call options on illiquid stocks driving prices (temporarily) higher. (And who are effectively allowing earlier players to cash out.)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227
    edited January 2021
    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863

    kinabalu said:

    This global pandemic will not be best solved by nation states competing to vaccinate their own populations.

    Yes it damned well will. That is EXACTLY how it will be solved. The very last thing to do is some kind of soggy Gordon-Brown style international initiative with no country putting their all into getting their own population jabbed, bogged down in quibbles about one country refusing to cooperate with its neighbour, with politicians given a get-out-of-jail-free card because there's no incentive to do well internationally, and with meagre early supplies dissipated around the world in such small quantities that nowhere gains significant immunity and can open up again.

    Of course that's not at all to say 'every man for himself'. Quite the opposite, once we've got our own population protected we can go all-out on making vaccines available to other countries, and hope that they too will be competing with each other to get their own populations protected ASAP.
    A "soggy Gordon Brown style" international initiative such as the one that co-ordinated global action to respond to the Financial Crash?

    Could do worse.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    RobD said:

    Is there actually any reason for the Scottish government wanting to publish the numbers against the wishes of the UK government? Not publishing them due to commercial sensitivities seems completely reasonable.

    The uncharitable might think it’s to draw attention away from the number they should publish - how many are available to them NOW and waiting to be injected. Perhaps the U.K. government should just publish the numbers for availability by country.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    edited January 2021
    TimT said:

    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
    They should now have enough doses purchased to get to herd immunity. The task is going to be jabbing enough arms. Also, very glad that our donation to CEPI has facilitated Novavax being selected by the SII for mass production along with the AZ vaccine.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863
    kle4 said:

    Poor Kinabalu - who I had previously respected as a top poster despite the fact that he and I are opposed on virtually everything - has completely shredded his reputation as a sensible poster on here tonight.

    Such a pity when Remoaners demonstrate their complete hatred for Britain!

    Seems a bit harsh. I'm more on the side of it being reasonable to get a long way through our own programme before getting into how we can help others use our oversupply, but his heart seems to be in the right place and most people seem on board with the fundamental aim of helping, just not on the path to getting there.
    Thank you. But it's a brain not a heart matter.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    Wasn't Leon praising the Israeli government for doing whatever was necessary to protect Israeli citizens from this virus? Including paying over the odds for vaccines. Which is what the British government is currently being praised for. Not quite sure why you say this amounts to anti-semitism.

    But perhaps I've missed what you are complaining about.

    Personally, I like the variety of views and dislike any sort of bullying of people who are outside the consensus.
    See my previous post.
    We all know that there are antisemitic tropes about Jews, Israel, divided loyalties, money, and finance, so if you're going to go near that territory, one normally tries to make sure you aren't going to be misunderstood. The "cough cough" thing is the exact opposite of that. It's a nudge and a smirk, a little wink when you say the code.
  • Options
    On the question of countries competing with one another, does anyone seriously think that, if EU27 politicians weren't embarrassed by the comparison with the UK, they'd be scrambling as hard as they now are to get supplies? Admittedly they are not yet scrambling very efficaciously (that will hopefully come soon), but if they weren't being asked pointed questions about why they were behind, they'd be ambling along complacently. That's how politics works.
  • Options

    kle4 said:

    Well when there are shortages, we just won't be able to send as much to Scotland....
    Ridiculous even as a joke. Even when provoked, if seen that way, responses would be proportionate and not self defeating, such as punishing a part of our own country.

    We only ever do that unintentionally.
    That isn't what I meant....It is just a fact that if there are shortages, Scotland will get less, just like every other country / area of the UK.
    Yeah right, at least have the balls to own your 'humour'.
    Though I can see the rsi Cartman stuff may give you pause on that thing.
    No I was being serious, if Sturgeon announces these numbers and then it means we get less, that means less to Scotland. It is self defeating.
    Sure thing, chief.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,429
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    I can see dixiedeans point, but frankly even though they have to be on their guard I think it is a bit unrealistic for politicians to be able to guard against their words being taken out of context in all occasions by covering themselves like that.

    Senior politicians hate speaking to people, particularly off script, enough as it is.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    Early this morning, a failing chain of video game retailers, who is being beaten by Amazon and digital distribitution, which is loss making, and which is seeing its sales fall, reached a value that would have made it the sixth largest company in the FTSE100, ahead of Vodafone.

    Day traders on Robinhood discovered that if they acted in concert they could create a massive short squeeze. (GME was heavily shorted because... well, it's going to go out of business.) As the price ran, up hedge funds found that they had growing losses and were forced to close their positions by buying back stock. This sent the stock into the stratosphere.

    Smart daytraders (both of them) will have left the party at this point. Dumb ones will remain, and will lose all their money as their call options expire worthless on Feb 19, as the number of real buyers of GME stock at (checks price) $250 is... ummm.... zero.
    That is perhaps a little unfair to GameStop.

    Yes they had been failing but the effective takeover by the Chewy founder and the plans to move far more online combined with the Microsoft deal meant that by the beginning of this year they were in a much better position. Indeed the Shorters had been desperately trying to drive the share price down unsuccessfully. They were trying to break a company that had probably turned the corner in order to defend their earlier short positions.

    Personally I am very glad they have had their fingers burnt and it would be nice to see GameStop now move into a sustainable position again.
    Hmmm.

    PC games are now almost entirely sold on-line - and Steam is the number one player there, and Epic a distant second. Where is GameStop?

    In consoles, Microsoft and Sony are now trying to get people paying monthly subscriptions (and are succeeding). Physical console game sales will - inevitably - be more expensive those delivered directly over the Internet.

    And then there are products like Stadia and GeForce Now and Amazon's game streaming service.

    Right now, GameStop is briefly benefiting from the launch of new consoles. But what's their long term competitive advantage? Especially as they are already loss making, and can't match the investments made by other players.

    They're Radio Shack.

    I have no love or loathing for short sellers. But I struggle to see a long term winning strategy for GameStop.
    Well they have already apparently done a deal with microsoft which looks very valuable.

    GameStop will get a cut of any digital game download, downloadable content, microtransaction, or paid subscription made through each digital gaming console it sells for the Xbox ecosystem. That is why the price was continuing to rise since last autumn in spite of the short sellers trying to drive it down.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,179
    If the EU blocks our Pfizer exports, we might as well chuck the trade agreement in the bin.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,429
    edited January 2021

    kle4 said:

    Well when there are shortages, we just won't be able to send as much to Scotland....
    Ridiculous even as a joke. Even when provoked, if seen that way, responses would be proportionate and not self defeating, such as punishing a part of our own country.

    We only ever do that unintentionally.
    That isn't what I meant....It is just a fact that if there are shortages, Scotland will get less, just like every other country / area of the UK.
    Yeah right, at least have the balls to own your 'humour'.
    Though I can see the rsi Cartman stuff may give you pause on that thing.
    No I was being serious, if Sturgeon announces these numbers and then it means we get less, that means less to Scotland. It is self defeating.
    Sure thing, chief.
    You're not telling us what other people really meant are you? That's a service I understand, and it would be taking things a bit seriously.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,750

    BBC News said the UK vaccination programme is outstripping most of Europe....there is no most of about it.

    (So long as you don't say Israel is in Europe.)
  • Options
    TrèsDifficileTrèsDifficile Posts: 1,729
    edited January 2021

    On the question of countries competing with one another, does anyone seriously think that, if EU27 politicians weren't embarrassed by the comparison with the UK, they'd be scrambling as hard as they now are to get supplies? Admittedly they are not yet scrambling very efficaciously (that will hopefully come soon), but if they weren't being asked pointed questions about why they were behind, they'd be ambling along complacently. That's how politics works.

    So implicit threats are cool, and we should keep SingTFU?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,429
    TimT said:

    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
    Aren't a lot of these vaccines getting produced in large quantities in India as well?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,148



    No I was being serious, if Sturgeon announces these numbers and then it means we get less, that means less to Scotland. It is self defeating.

    Don't worry FU I knew what you meant :D

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101
    TimT said:

    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
    A billion each of Oxford AstraZeneca and Novamax - and 200 million Gamaleya
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686
    Pulpstar said:

    If the EU blocks our Pfizer exports, we might as well chuck the trade agreement in the bin.

    I don't think it will come to that, though their lack of a deal for Novavax is really quite puzzling.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,915

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    You can criticise the EU on this specific issue but still believe it was a mistake to leave it, as I do.

    Perhaps the reason that people who think as I do are rather quiet on here at the moment is due to the rather unpleasant, bullying tone deployed towards anybody pro-EU on here at the moment by several posters. Led by you. It's a pretty good attempt at 'cancelling' those who are pro-EU (in general, rather than on the vaccine debate).
  • Options

    x

    On the question of countries competing with one another, does anyone seriously think that, if EU27 politicians weren't embarrassed by the comparison with the UK, they'd be scrambling as hard as they now are to get supplies? Admittedly they are not yet scrambling very efficaciously (that will hopefully come soon), but if they weren't being asked pointed questions about why they were behind, they'd be ambling along complacently. That's how politics works.

    So implicit threats are cool, and we should keep SingTFU?
    No, we should concentrate on getting on with jabbing people as fast as we can. Leading by example.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kle4 said:

    Poor Kinabalu - who I had previously respected as a top poster despite the fact that he and I are opposed on virtually everything - has completely shredded his reputation as a sensible poster on here tonight.

    Such a pity when Remoaners demonstrate their complete hatred for Britain!

    Seems a bit harsh. I'm more on the side of it being reasonable to get a long way through our own programme before getting into how we can help others use our oversupply, but his heart seems to be in the right place and most people seem on board with the fundamental aim of helping, just not on the path to getting there.
    He just seems to gotten this idée fixe in his head that the younger half of the UK population should willingly sacrifice their health and freedom for the rest of the world's population out of sheer self-harming altruism.

    This is one of those bonkers policies - like the 'open everything up, we'll be fine' of the Great Barringtonites - that is born of such ideological myopia that you have to thank God that the people who dreamed it up are not in charge of making the actual decisions. The kind of anger it would generate in the public would be like nothing seen in generations.

    Yes, nation-states are how we'll beat this thing. Because those are the entities that have the keenest interest and incentive in helping their own citizens back to normal life - and those citizens are entitled to be helped first before anyone else. That's the social contract. If the oxygen gives out on a plane, you put your own damned mask on first before you can help anyone else.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Pulpstar said:

    If the EU blocks our Pfizer exports, we might as well chuck the trade agreement in the bin.

    Pro Eu posters kept saying that Brexit would endanger Western security - I thought they meant it would be us doing the damaging, turns out they must have meant the EU......
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    If the EU blocks our Pfizer exports, we might as well chuck the trade agreement in the bin.

    I don't think it will come to that, though their lack of a deal for Novavax is really quite puzzling.
    I think we have a good handle on how the EU have approached this....we are big, give us a discount, erhhh no the price is the price as everybody wants this, give us a discount, errrh no, give us a discount, months go by....company has deals for 100 millions with loads of other people...ok you can have a discount, but you are at the back of the queue.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    TimT said:

    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
    A billion each of Oxford AstraZeneca and Novamax - and 200 million Gamaleya
    Plus a couple of home grown?
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    They are Reddit posters investing to move the price because it’s “fun”
    Entirely the wrong sort to be manipulating the markets.
    Market manipulation is a crime. When professionals do it, they go to jail.

    When Reddit users do it, they make a tonne of money, and then the poor idiots who follow them lose all their money.

    The number of subscribers on r/WallStreetBets increased from 3m to 4m in one day this week. That's one million patsies who are going to engage in buying call options on illiquid stocks driving prices (temporarily) higher. (And who are effectively allowing earlier players to cash out.)
    I would suggest your criticism is misplaced. Better to direct it at the short sellers whose whole existence is based on manipulating the market. What the Reddit users did was simply playing them at their own game.
  • Options
    Why are Sanofi still on that chart? Hasn't their jab been scrapped and they're looking towards Pfizer instead?
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,087

    Brian Rose* is back as your humble Dumbosaurus predicted earlier, ladies and gentlemen. Lay here and get back on the Rose train!

    *Or the totally unconnected, extremely wise and independent backer who keeps throwing money at him on Betfair because they think he's genuinely an 11/1 chance...

    I've laid Rose at an average of 6.7. He was out to 22 earlier this evening. Now back to 13. Free money. Extraordinary.


  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
  • Options

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    Wasn't Leon praising the Israeli government for doing whatever was necessary to protect Israeli citizens from this virus? Including paying over the odds for vaccines. Which is what the British government is currently being praised for. Not quite sure why you say this amounts to anti-semitism.

    But perhaps I've missed what you are complaining about.

    Personally, I like the variety of views and dislike any sort of bullying of people who are outside the consensus.
    See my previous post.
    We all know that there are antisemitic tropes about Jews, Israel, divided loyalties, money, and finance, so if you're going to go near that territory, one normally tries to make sure you aren't going to be misunderstood. The "cough cough" thing is the exact opposite of that. It's a nudge and a smirk, a little wink when you say the code.
    You really are deluded.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,148
    Pulpstar said:

    If the EU blocks our Pfizer exports, we might as well chuck the trade agreement in the bin.

    It's will be a deceased trade deal...
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    This global pandemic will not be best solved by nation states competing to vaccinate their own populations.

    Yes it damned well will. That is EXACTLY how it will be solved. The very last thing to do is some kind of soggy Gordon-Brown style international initiative with no country putting their all into getting their own population jabbed, bogged down in quibbles about one country refusing to cooperate with its neighbour, with politicians given a get-out-of-jail-free card because there's no incentive to do well internationally, and with meagre early supplies dissipated around the world in such small quantities that nowhere gains significant immunity and can open up again.

    Of course that's not at all to say 'every man for himself'. Quite the opposite, once we've got our own population protected we can go all-out on making vaccines available to other countries, and hope that they too will be competing with each other to get their own populations protected ASAP.
    A "soggy Gordon Brown style" international initiative such as the one that co-ordinated global action to respond to the Financial Crash?

    Could do worse.
    I've never understood what on earth that claim was about. Inasmuch as it wasn't a complete figment of Brown's imagination that he'd 'saved the world', it seems to have comprised him muttering something at an international summit, and then everyone saying 'Yes, Gordon' and going on to do what they were planning to do anyway.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Brom said:

    gealbhan said:

    “ Downing Street has refused to rule out the possibility of the UK sending vaccine supplies to the EU once the most vulnerable people in the UK have been vaccinated, assuming the timetable to vaccinate other adults by September stays on track. “

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/jan/28/uk-covid-live-coronavirus-boris-johnson-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-vaccine-travel-quarantine-latest-updates

    Do it Boris. Don’t listen to the rabid anti Christian ravers on PB. Their only religion is frothed up hatred of EU, that’s not Brexit is it?

    Once vulnerable people in UK have been jabbed, share it Boris.

    Keep your religion in your church please.

    I think you'll find everyone here said that the EU getting doses once everyone in the UK has had it would be fair enough. You were saying to do it before vaccinations here are completed.
    Agreed. Once our over 60s and potentially then key workers are done I would understand if vaccines for the likes of myself were diverted to help priority groups in Europe.
    When I said completed I meant completed. Everyone done.
    Insisting on everyone in one country being done before the vulnerable elsewhere is exactly the sort of vaccine nationalism that will prolong the pandemic.
    Er, what? I'm happy to wait until older and more vulnerable Britons have been protected, but no way am I waiting until all those groups in the entire EU have been done! There's altruism, and then there's masochistic martyrdom.
    A natural enough impulse but the decision makers will hopefully be more far-sighted. From each according to their abilities. To each according to their needs. This must be more than a platitude on the global vaccination. It must be the guiding spirit. Otherwise forget about getting out of this before many more years have passed.
    No way - we get all our people done first and then we can be as generous to the rest of the world as we like. Making younger people wait any longer than they are due to already would be a catastrophic mistake, and I hope the government won't be stupid enough to make it.
    If all countries follow that template it will prolong the pandemic.
    Can we assume you will decline the vaccination so that people at higher risk throughout the world can receive if first ?
    Can we assume you would steal a jab from a penniless 85 year old Arabian nomad?
    Unlike you we would prioritize the poor nations over those rich EU nations
    Did you not realise Kinablu was a bigot before this and that white europeans count more?
    Every person in the world has an equal right to the vaccine age for age. This should be the assumption and the goal. We will deviate from this since there is national politics to deal with but the deviation should be minimised. A global needs driven vaccination is best for ending this global pandemic in the shortest time with lowest risk of more black swans.
    Show your working.
    It's all in my head. But it does stack up. You just have to imagine there's no countries. Normally that's Lennony airhead dreaming but this is a rare case where it works.
    If there were no countries then there'd only be individuals. Each man or woman for himself.

    Is that what you want? Or do you just have no logic at all?
    "Cross border solution" is the more prosaic way to express it. Let's go with that.
  • Options
    Seriously though, I'm shocked by you all. for not answering.

    CTA first or not for UK vaccines?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    They are Reddit posters investing to move the price because it’s “fun”
    Entirely the wrong sort to be manipulating the markets.
    Market manipulation is a crime. When professionals do it, they go to jail.

    When Reddit users do it, they make a tonne of money, and then the poor idiots who follow them lose all their money.

    The number of subscribers on r/WallStreetBets increased from 3m to 4m in one day this week. That's one million patsies who are going to engage in buying call options on illiquid stocks driving prices (temporarily) higher. (And who are effectively allowing earlier players to cash out.)
    As I said. Wrong sort to be making a tonne of money. Disgraceful.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
    Reading it now, I don't see any connection to the CEO of Pfizer. Looks more like a dark-humoured laugh at the prospect of Israel sending results of medical experiments to company founded by German descendants. The alternative suggestion, that they coughed up, seems plausible.

  • Options
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Well when there are shortages, we just won't be able to send as much to Scotland....
    Ridiculous even as a joke. Even when provoked, if seen that way, responses would be proportionate and not self defeating, such as punishing a part of our own country.

    We only ever do that unintentionally.
    That isn't what I meant....It is just a fact that if there are shortages, Scotland will get less, just like every other country / area of the UK.
    Yeah right, at least have the balls to own your 'humour'.
    Though I can see the rsi Cartman stuff may give you pause on that thing.
    No I was being serious, if Sturgeon announces these numbers and then it means we get less, that means less to Scotland. It is self defeating.
    Sure thing, chief.
    You're not telling us what other people really meant are you? That's a service I understand, and it would be taking things a bit seriously.
    I'm not telling you anything.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    Wasn't Leon praising the Israeli government for doing whatever was necessary to protect Israeli citizens from this virus? Including paying over the odds for vaccines. Which is what the British government is currently being praised for. Not quite sure why you say this amounts to anti-semitism.

    But perhaps I've missed what you are complaining about.

    Personally, I like the variety of views and dislike any sort of bullying of people who are outside the consensus.
    See my previous post.
    We all know that there are antisemitic tropes about Jews, Israel, divided loyalties, money, and finance, so if you're going to go near that territory, one normally tries to make sure you aren't going to be misunderstood. The "cough cough" thing is the exact opposite of that. It's a nudge and a smirk, a little wink when you say the code.
    Oh, leave it out. The money involved is a pittance relative to Israel's currently decimated tourism and hospitality industry, and Pfizer are getting way more out of the deal via the data Israel is collecting for them. Any other smallish country with reasonable data collection and an efficient health service could have done the same deal; Israel happens to have been well-placed and got in first.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227
    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    Only because journalists these days are complete morons.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Floater said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Brom said:

    gealbhan said:

    “ Downing Street has refused to rule out the possibility of the UK sending vaccine supplies to the EU once the most vulnerable people in the UK have been vaccinated, assuming the timetable to vaccinate other adults by September stays on track. “

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/jan/28/uk-covid-live-coronavirus-boris-johnson-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-vaccine-travel-quarantine-latest-updates

    Do it Boris. Don’t listen to the rabid anti Christian ravers on PB. Their only religion is frothed up hatred of EU, that’s not Brexit is it?

    Once vulnerable people in UK have been jabbed, share it Boris.

    Keep your religion in your church please.

    I think you'll find everyone here said that the EU getting doses once everyone in the UK has had it would be fair enough. You were saying to do it before vaccinations here are completed.
    Agreed. Once our over 60s and potentially then key workers are done I would understand if vaccines for the likes of myself were diverted to help priority groups in Europe.
    When I said completed I meant completed. Everyone done.
    Insisting on everyone in one country being done before the vulnerable elsewhere is exactly the sort of vaccine nationalism that will prolong the pandemic.
    Er, what? I'm happy to wait until older and more vulnerable Britons have been protected, but no way am I waiting until all those groups in the entire EU have been done! There's altruism, and then there's masochistic martyrdom.
    A natural enough impulse but the decision makers will hopefully be more far-sighted. From each according to their abilities. To each according to their needs. This must be more than a platitude on the global vaccination. It must be the guiding spirit. Otherwise forget about getting out of this before many more years have passed.
    No way - we get all our people done first and then we can be as generous to the rest of the world as we like. Making younger people wait any longer than they are due to already would be a catastrophic mistake, and I hope the government won't be stupid enough to make it.
    If all countries follow that template it will prolong the pandemic.
    Can we assume you will decline the vaccination so that people at higher risk throughout the world can receive if first ?
    Can we assume you would steal a jab from a penniless 85 year old Arabian nomad?
    Unlike you we would prioritize the poor nations over those rich EU nations
    Did you not realise Kinablu was a bigot before this and that white europeans count more?
    Every person in the world has an equal right to the vaccine age for age. This should be the assumption and the goal. We will deviate from this since there is national politics to deal with but the deviation should be minimised. A global needs driven vaccination is best for ending this global pandemic in the shortest time with lowest risk of more black swans.
    Show your working.
    It's all in my head. But it does stack up. You just have to imagine there's no countries. Normally that's Lennony airhead dreaming but this is a rare case where it works.
    If there were no countries then there'd only be individuals. Each man or woman for himself.

    Is that what you want? Or do you just have no logic at all?
    "Cross border solution" is the more prosaic way to express it. Let's go with that.
    If you want to see a "cross border solution" in action look at what the EU is doing.

    Its a dismal failure. And you want that replicated worldwide? Because that's best for the globe?

    Have you no integrity whatsoever?
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    TimT said:

    TimT said:

    The Indian vaccine portfolio must be looking pretty good at this moment
    A billion each of Oxford AstraZeneca and Novamax - and 200 million Gamaleya
    Plus a couple of home grown?
    700m Covaxin
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    Only because journalists these days are complete morons.
    Well there is that...
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 26,074
    Before I hit the hay, thinking about the vaccines issue, I don't think we should withold anything from anyone because it's 'what they deserve', or 'they'd do it to us' or anything like that. And it is indeed in our interests to ensure that Covid is banished from the entire world, and probably even more so our close neighbours.

    However, as so many people have said, we know that half measures don't really work against this disease. A semi-vaccinated populace isn't going to work. Brutal as it sounds, slowing the UK effort to make the EU effort a small amount quicker, won't actually help them to the same degree that it would hinder us, and Covid would rumble on. We need to stamp this thing hard. Only when supply for everyone here is assured (which shouldn't be too long), we can help other countries, and we should plan for it now. That isn't about punishing people, it's about what is required to beat Covid, and what every country that can do it should do.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269

    Cyclefree said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    Wasn't Leon praising the Israeli government for doing whatever was necessary to protect Israeli citizens from this virus? Including paying over the odds for vaccines. Which is what the British government is currently being praised for. Not quite sure why you say this amounts to anti-semitism.

    But perhaps I've missed what you are complaining about.

    Personally, I like the variety of views and dislike any sort of bullying of people who are outside the consensus.
    See my previous post.
    We all know that there are antisemitic tropes about Jews, Israel, divided loyalties, money, and finance, so if you're going to go near that territory, one normally tries to make sure you aren't going to be misunderstood. The "cough cough" thing is the exact opposite of that. It's a nudge and a smirk, a little wink when you say the code.
    I don't recall getting that impression when I read the comment but I would need to see the full comment again to see if your interpretation might be justified.

  • Options
    The return of the Herd is giving me a real pre-2016 vibe. I thought Brexit had killed it off forever.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,429
    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    He didn't need to explain the context until someone deliberately took it out of context. No one can guard against that all the time, since no can predict all the ways they might be taken out of context.

    I could remove the preceding quotes before yours and claim yours was therefore a nonsensical mess. Who was this 'he' being referred to, what was the question and answer? Why cannot dixiedean write sensibly?

    But that would be on me for misrepresenting you, and while you could guard against it by setting out full context in your own reply, that would hardly be reasonable.
  • Options

    Seriously though, I'm shocked by you all. for not answering.

    CTA first or not for UK vaccines?

    Once the UK is done we should be moving on to Covax - but I think bailing out our Irish neighbours in the CTA certainly might not be a terrible idea for all sorts of reasons.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227
    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    Only because journalists these days are complete morons.
    Well there is that...
    It's gotcha journalism at its finest. Waiting for someone to mess up, without actually reading the context of what they said. Anyone who watched the question and answer wouldn't have batted an eyelid at his response.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,300
    Andy_JS said:

    Disappointed that Newsnight just had a Wall Street supporter on the show to discuss the Robinhood controversy. Predictably he blamed the amateurs for spoiling everything.

    Hmm.
    https://twitter.com/drug_smolecules/status/1354812189463330821
  • Options
    RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788

    Why are Sanofi still on that chart? Hasn't their jab been scrapped and they're looking towards Pfizer instead?
    It hasn't strictly failed yet, they're still aiming to release one at the end of 2021, otherwise it would have been marked in yellow.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    Only because journalists these days are complete morons.
    Well there is that...
    It's gotcha journalism at its finest. Waiting for someone to mess up, without actually reading the context of what they said. Anyone who watched the question and answer wouldn't have batted an eyelid at his response.
    And we wonder why high quality candidates don't want to go into politics.....less pay, the Daily Mail taking photos of you playing rugby with your kids and every single interview you do, clipped and your words taken out of context and shared on social media.

    Lifes too short for most people.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    RobD said:

    Is there actually any reason for the Scottish government wanting to publish the numbers against the wishes of the UK government? Not publishing them due to commercial sensitivities seems completely reasonable.

    The uncharitable might think it’s to draw attention away from the number they should publish - how many are available to them NOW and waiting to be injected. Perhaps the U.K. government should just publish the numbers for availability by country.
    Well, if these numbers are anything like accurate then they might go some way to explaining why the Scottish Government would be keen on engaging in diversionary tactics...

    UK:

    Doses administered: 7,923,497
    Doses per 100 people: 11.86
    Daily rate of doses administered: 355,173

    England:

    Doses administered: 6,918,853
    Doses per 100 people: 12.29
    Daily rate of doses administered: 311,182

    Scotland:

    Doses administered: 468,688
    Doses per 100 people: 8.58
    Daily rate of doses administered: 18,479

    Wales:

    Doses administered: 336,745
    Doses per 100 people: 10.68
    Daily rate of doses administered: 20,845

    Northern Ireland:

    Doses administered: 199,211
    Doses per 100 people: 10.52
    Daily rate of doses administered: 4,668

    Scotland appears presently to have a smaller number of shots going into arms in absolute terms than Wales (which is a significantly smaller country, of course,) and is some distance adrift of the rest of the UK in terms of jabs given per head of population. Now, either there's some dastardly conspiracy afoot here to starve Scotland of vaccine, or the Scottish Government's response to this pandemic has not, in fact, been vastly superior to that of the remainder of the UK in every conceivable respect.

    They've not yet worked out how to blame Westminster for this one, so picking a fight with it is the next best thing.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
    I detect this generally around . No particular reason for PB to be asymptomatic.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,686

    Why are Sanofi still on that chart? Hasn't their jab been scrapped and they're looking towards Pfizer instead?
    No, it came pretty close to being over 50% so they are reformulating it and having a second go at efficacy trials to see if they can get it 80-90%. The issue is that starting a new P3 trial at the same time as active vaccine programmes is notoriously difficult. It will be almost impossible for them to get any trial participants in the UK or US for example. That's two jurisdictions where running a clinical trial is fairly easy with a strong regulator and clear rules. It will be difficult for them to get approval before the end of the year.
  • Options

    She's playing with fire on this one. There are times you can go for that narrow partisan advantage, other times it's just wise to bite your tongue. If she is wondering which way to go, then I suggest she looks across the North Sea to see how vaccine games can go badly wrong...
    Is there a whiff of honeymoon termination about it?
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,082
    edited January 2021
    [deleted]
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    They are Reddit posters investing to move the price because it’s “fun”
    Entirely the wrong sort to be manipulating the markets.
    Market manipulation is a crime. When professionals do it, they go to jail.

    When Reddit users do it, they make a tonne of money, and then the poor idiots who follow them lose all their money.

    The number of subscribers on r/WallStreetBets increased from 3m to 4m in one day this week. That's one million patsies who are going to engage in buying call options on illiquid stocks driving prices (temporarily) higher. (And who are effectively allowing earlier players to cash out.)
    I would suggest your criticism is misplaced. Better to direct it at the short sellers whose whole existence is based on manipulating the market. What the Reddit users did was simply playing them at their own game.
    Yes, until they started (inadvertently or otherwise) encouraging their hapless and greedy supporters (many of which unsophisticated retail investors burning their stimulus cheques) to buy in at stupid levels, promising them that they could keep forcing the stock ever higher and bring down Wall Street. The short sellers weren't actively trying to manipulate the price down, they'd just taken a view that it was headed that way (based on fundamentals, and probably correct).

    In Reddit parlance, Everyone Sucks Here.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    edited January 2021
    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    Only because journalists these days are complete morons.
    Well there is that...
    It's gotcha journalism at its finest. Waiting for someone to mess up, without actually reading the context of what they said. Anyone who watched the question and answer wouldn't have batted an eyelid at his response.
    I bow to no one in my disdain for journalists.
    They are the main game in town though.
    He shouldn't have to. But he does.
    Anyways. I fear I may be suffering the first sign of @Ishmael_Z's tetchosity. So I will concede the point with best wishes.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    This global pandemic will not be best solved by nation states competing to vaccinate their own populations.

    Yes it damned well will. That is EXACTLY how it will be solved. The very last thing to do is some kind of soggy Gordon-Brown style international initiative with no country putting their all into getting their own population jabbed, bogged down in quibbles about one country refusing to cooperate with its neighbour, with politicians given a get-out-of-jail-free card because there's no incentive to do well internationally, and with meagre early supplies dissipated around the world in such small quantities that nowhere gains significant immunity and can open up again.

    Of course that's not at all to say 'every man for himself'. Quite the opposite, once we've got our own population protected we can go all-out on making vaccines available to other countries, and hope that they too will be competing with each other to get their own populations protected ASAP.
    A "soggy Gordon Brown style" international initiative such as the one that co-ordinated global action to respond to the Financial Crash?

    Could do worse.
    I've never understood what on earth that claim was about. Inasmuch as it wasn't a complete figment of Brown's imagination that he'd 'saved the world', it seems to have comprised him muttering something at an international summit, and then everyone saying 'Yes, Gordon' and going on to do what they were planning to do anyway.
    Not at all. He was key to the action taken and it worked. It's the consensus of all involved. C'mon.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Seriously though, I'm shocked by you all. for not answering.

    CTA first or not for UK vaccines?

    It'd be a very good idea to bail Ireland.

    Whether or not, as per a question I believe you asked earlier this evening, they would be willing or able to accept preferential treatment over the rest of the 27, I have no idea.
  • Options

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    You can criticise the EU on this specific issue but still believe it was a mistake to leave it, as I do.

    Perhaps the reason that people who think as I do are rather quiet on here at the moment is due to the rather unpleasant, bullying tone deployed towards anybody pro-EU on here at the moment by several posters. Led by you. It's a pretty good attempt at 'cancelling' those who are pro-EU (in general, rather than on the vaccine debate).
    But that's no fun, is it?

    Yeah- the EU vaccine procurement process is slower and has spent less money than the UK did. That's worked out to their disadvantage. The public stuff over the last few days isn't dignified- though how much of that is performative while the real work goes on behind-the-scenes remains to be seen.

    And the approval has been less nimble- but given the antivax culture in parts of Europe, that's probably necessary to get confidence for the doses they do give out.

    And despite the mistakes and structural problems, Europe as a whole is vaccinating about as fast as Canada, and Japan and Australia have barely started. Europe will be fine, and the vaccine scarcity world looks like it won't last long at all.

    It's just a shame that the UK's genuine achievement in vaccination isn't enough; it has to be combined with obsessing about the failure of others.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
    Reading it now, I don't see any connection to the CEO of Pfizer. Looks more like a dark-humoured laugh at the prospect of Israel sending results of medical experiments to company founded by German descendants. The alternative suggestion, that they coughed up, seems plausible.

    Full marks for the creative attempt, but even the person in question didn't try to explain it in that way. So no, that's not what they meant.

    Still, we've moved on from silence to actually talking about this. I guess that's the PB equivalent of going from Corbyn to Starmer. Probably quite a way to to still.
  • Options
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Because what you are claiming as europhobia and vaccine nationalism is nothing of the sort. You are simply ignoring the facts and making stuff up to suit your own preconceived ideas that anything the EU does must automatically be right and anything the UK does must automatically be wrong. It is a very poor position to take.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,148
    edited January 2021
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
    I've seen it much worse than this.... ;)

    She's playing with fire on this one. There are times you can go for that narrow partisan advantage, other times it's just wise to bite your tongue. If she is wondering which way to go, then I suggest she looks across the North Sea to see how vaccine games can go badly wrong...
    Mystic GIN has predicted Ms. Sturgeon was going to have an unexpected fall in 2021... ;)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,227

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
    Reading it now, I don't see any connection to the CEO of Pfizer. Looks more like a dark-humoured laugh at the prospect of Israel sending results of medical experiments to company founded by German descendants. The alternative suggestion, that they coughed up, seems plausible.

    Full marks for the creative attempt, but even the person in question didn't try to explain it in that way. So no, that's not what they meant.

    Still, we've moved on from silence to actually talking about this. I guess that's the PB equivalent of going from Corbyn to Starmer. Probably quite a way to to still.
    Sorry, could you point it out to me? And like I said, I see no reference to the CEO.
    Leon said:


    Bless, You think an unexpected early deal between - cough - Israel- - and - cough - Pfizer - was made on the basis of the sharing of medical data?

    Israel. And. Pfizer.

    Hm.

    Or the deal was made because Israel agreed to pay BILLIONS over the odds to secure the global life-raft of the Jewish people? Colour me cynical, but I suspect a large amount of money played a significant role

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,300
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
    And more than a bit OTTin the context of stories like this.

    The Zimbabwe Event
    https://www.epsilontheory.com/the-zimbabwe-event-2/
    Over the past two weeks, three senior Cabinet officials in Zimbabwe (including the Foreign Minister and the Infrastructure Minister) have died from Covid. Not gotten sick. Died. More broadly, reported Covid cases and deaths have exploded in this country of 15 million just in the month of January. The unreported numbers are certainly much higher, as about 90% of Zimbabwe’s population works outside of the formal economy, and the majority of Zimbabweans have little to no access to the healthcare facilities that report these official case and death numbers...

    ... In a desperately poor country like Zimbabwe – and there are a lot of Zimbabwes in the world – the violence of popular discontent and elite conflict is obvious enough. When the core functions of a domestic government effectively collapse, civilian life in these circumstances quickly becomes, as Hobbes would say, nasty, brutish and short. The outcome of these circumstances is ALWAYS war. First a war of all against all, then a war of organized factions, then (often) a war of nations. Some of these wars in the Zimbabwes of the world will be entirely internal to existing borders. Some of these wars will cross those borders. Some of these wars will include major powers. ...

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
    I sense it is virus related. It's created a base environment that is taut and tense, and then this vaccine thing with the hated Europe, so soon after Brexit, has sent the engerland engerland testosterone levels into orbit.
  • Options
    The Covid tiers system could be scrapped after lockdown under plans to ease restrictions on a national basis, the Mail can reveal.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9199181/egional-Covid-19-curbs-scrapped-plan-ease-restrictions-national-basis.html
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,590
    edited January 2021
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:

    RobD said:

    dixiedean said:



    Fair enough then.
    Although an "And indeed Dads too" would have been much simpler and politically savvier. No need then for a PR team to rebut.

    Much simpler? He was directly answering a question about mums.
    Oh come on. Basic politics.
    This kind of hyper-sensitivity to not including/including a certain group is ridiculous. He was asked a question about mums and answered it.
    It's not hyper sensitive. He answered a question. Then needed his PR team to explain the context.
    That is not ideal.
    He didn't need to explain the context until someone deliberately took it out of context. No one can guard against that all the time, since no can predict all the ways they might be taken out of context.

    I could remove the preceding quotes before yours and claim yours was therefore a nonsensical mess. Who was this 'he' being referred to, what was the question and answer? Why cannot dixiedean write sensibly?

    But that would be on me for misrepresenting you, and while you could guard against it by setting out full context in your own reply, that would hardly be reasonable.
    Yep. Fair criticism from a fair poster. I recant.
    In mitigation I cite the tetchosity virus.
    And argue that I have not as yet suggested War, sanctions, torture or military occupation.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,915
    edited January 2021

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    You can criticise the EU on this specific issue but still believe it was a mistake to leave it, as I do.

    Perhaps the reason that people who think as I do are rather quiet on here at the moment is due to the rather unpleasant, bullying tone deployed towards anybody pro-EU on here at the moment by several posters. Led by you. It's a pretty good attempt at 'cancelling' those who are pro-EU (in general, rather than on the vaccine debate).
    Not at all. There has been considerable praise from Leave supporters on here for those Remainers who have differentiated between support for the EU and sensible criticism of the actions taken over this specific episode.

    But it is right to scorn those who try to defend the current EU clusterf*ck in spite of all the evidence that everyone else - whether pro or anti EU - can see as plain as day.

    And when those posters, or one in particular, decides to try and take the moral highground and claim that those criticising the EU are doing so because of Europhobia - in spite of all the evidence to the contrary - they they need to be called out for it.
    I don't include you particularly in my observation, as you're generally calm and courteous when you disagree. But if you don't think that Europhobia shines through some posts tonight, you must be reading them very differently from me. Nobody, as far as I can see, is defending the EU's position on vaccines. But several posters have used this to engage in generalised attacks on the EU for everything, and on those who wished, and may still wish, to remain in the EU. And I don't like the vehemence of the attacks - particularly on the poster you mention, who is taking a principled position and is invariably courteous himself (I'm assuming Kinabalu is a him).

    Anyway, bed time. I hope the tone is less antagonistic tomorrow.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,594
    IshmaelZ said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Staggering levels of tetchosity over the last 24 hours. I don't know if all this is about what it's ostensibly about or whether a year of Covid has finally reduced PB to a Michael Douglas in Falling Down sort of state.
    It's a shitty January day during lockdown in the midst of a pandemic and a terrible recession. I think people are remarkably polite under the circs.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,426
    edited January 2021
    15% of UK adults have had a jab so far. 25% would be the 13 million people in the most vulnerable categories.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Because what you are claiming as europhobia and vaccine nationalism is nothing of the sort. You are simply ignoring the facts and making stuff up to suit your own preconceived ideas that anything the EU does must automatically be right and anything the UK does must automatically be wrong. It is a very poor position to take.
    Are you really saying that there has been NO element of europhobia and vaccine nationalism on here over the least few days? That seems as partial a reading as that which you're ascribing to Kinbalu.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    This global pandemic will not be best solved by nation states competing to vaccinate their own populations.

    Yes it damned well will. That is EXACTLY how it will be solved. The very last thing to do is some kind of soggy Gordon-Brown style international initiative with no country putting their all into getting their own population jabbed, bogged down in quibbles about one country refusing to cooperate with its neighbour, with politicians given a get-out-of-jail-free card because there's no incentive to do well internationally, and with meagre early supplies dissipated around the world in such small quantities that nowhere gains significant immunity and can open up again.

    Of course that's not at all to say 'every man for himself'. Quite the opposite, once we've got our own population protected we can go all-out on making vaccines available to other countries, and hope that they too will be competing with each other to get their own populations protected ASAP.
    A "soggy Gordon Brown style" international initiative such as the one that co-ordinated global action to respond to the Financial Crash?

    Could do worse.
    I've never understood what on earth that claim was about. Inasmuch as it wasn't a complete figment of Brown's imagination that he'd 'saved the world', it seems to have comprised him muttering something at an international summit, and then everyone saying 'Yes, Gordon' and going on to do what they were planning to do anyway.
    Not at all. He was key to the action taken and it worked. It's the consensus of all involved. C'mon.
    I was almost certain, from memory, that "saved the world" was a slip of the tongue, and he meant to say "saved the banks".

    Google seems to confirm. Am I forgetting something?
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/dec/10/gordon-brown-save-world-pmqs
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,300
    Endillion said:

    rcs1000 said:

    dixiedean said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    @Ishmael_X FPT

    Sorry just saw your question on the ethical difference between covered short selling and naked short selling.

    From a definition perspective, "naked short selling" is the sale of shares which cannot be proved to exist - i.e. (usually) where the short interest is >100% of the stock.

    That's illegal. Of course the law has nothing to do with ethics, but it's worth pointing out.

    On the difference between shorting when you have borrowed the stock and shorting when you haven't is one of risk. Usually the big institutions lend stock and earn an income from it. If you have to close your short then they will typically extend the contract if you can't buy in the market because they have an interest in an orderly market. (This doesn't mean they will allow you to make a profit if you mess up, but they won't drive you into bankruptcy).

    When you short without having borrowed you are taking much more risk because you are exposed to a short squeeze.

    The issues I have with this situation are:

    (a) Naked shorting is illegal
    (b) The hedge funds have been stupid and jumped on a bandwagon
    (c) Retail investors coordinating on a short squeeze are - in my view - engaging in market abuse

    No body comes out of this well.

    Someone else suggested it earlier, but I reckon the company should do a capital raise. But I doubt that any credible underwriters will run it for them.

    I've not been following this in detail, but I note that the business is a video games outfit. Are the legion of retail investors piling in mostly speculators hoping for a windfall, or game players rallying round their business? I know we can't really know for sure, but what sort of groups are pushing it?
    They are Reddit posters investing to move the price because it’s “fun”
    Entirely the wrong sort to be manipulating the markets.
    Market manipulation is a crime. When professionals do it, they go to jail.

    When Reddit users do it, they make a tonne of money, and then the poor idiots who follow them lose all their money.

    The number of subscribers on r/WallStreetBets increased from 3m to 4m in one day this week. That's one million patsies who are going to engage in buying call options on illiquid stocks driving prices (temporarily) higher. (And who are effectively allowing earlier players to cash out.)
    I would suggest your criticism is misplaced. Better to direct it at the short sellers whose whole existence is based on manipulating the market. What the Reddit users did was simply playing them at their own game.
    Yes, until they started (inadvertently or otherwise) encouraging their hapless and greedy supporters (many of which unsophisticated retail investors burning their stimulus cheques) to buy in at stupid levels, promising them that they could keep forcing the stock ever higher and bring down Wall Street. The short sellers weren't actively trying to manipulate the price down, they'd just taken a view that it was headed that way (based on fundamentals, and probably correct).

    In Reddit parlance, Everyone Sucks Here.
    On what evidence do you conclude that one side was manipulating, and the other wasn’t ?
    And sustained short attacks, despite what Charles tells us, can have real world consequences for companies well beyond ‘providing us with price information’, as this story rather neatly demonstrates:
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/01/amc-stock-reddit-movie-theaters-memes.html

    I get the strong whiff of double standards being applied.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,148
    Andy_JS said:

    15% of UK adults have had a jab so far. 25% would be the 13 million people in the most vulnerable categories.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/

    Excellent news, Thank you Andy J :D
  • Options

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    You can criticise the EU on this specific issue but still believe it was a mistake to leave it, as I do.

    Perhaps the reason that people who think as I do are rather quiet on here at the moment is due to the rather unpleasant, bullying tone deployed towards anybody pro-EU on here at the moment by several posters. Led by you. It's a pretty good attempt at 'cancelling' those who are pro-EU (in general, rather than on the vaccine debate).
    Not at all. There has been considerable praise from Leave supporters on here for those Remainers who have differentiated between support for the EU and sensible criticism of the actions taken over this specific episode.

    But it is right to scorn those who try to defend the current EU clusterf*ck in spite of all the evidence that everyone else - whether pro or anti EU - can see as plain as day.

    And when those posters, or one in particular, decides to try and take the moral highground and claim that those criticising the EU are doing so because of Europhobia - in spite of all the evidence to the contrary - they they need to be called out for it.
    I don't include you particularly in my observation, as you're generally calm and courteous when you disagree. But if you don't think that Europhobia shines through some posts tonight, you must be reading them very differently from me. And I don't like the vehemence of the attacks - particularly on the poster you mention, who is taking a principled position and is invariably courteous himself (I'm assuming Kinabalu is a him).
    Again that is why my criticism of Kinabalu was specifically directed as his comments over the last few days rather than a general attack.

    And his position on this is not in any way principled. Those he has been criticising have been very clear that the first duty of the Government should be to get their own population protected and then should be to help those who are least able to help themselves - which is certainly not the EU.

    Pointing out that the EU has failed dismally to invest in vaccine development compared to other first world countries and that they are now trying to use their economic power to force companies to supply them with vaccines because they also failed to commit to purchasing vaccines early enough or to licence them quickly enough is not Europhobia. Any more than attacking Johnson for his failure to shut borders, put in place a proper track and trace system or protect care homes is Anglophobia.

    Kinabalu has gone off the deep end in a quite ridiculous manner and deserves all the criticism he is getting.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,863

    I think we've reached some irretrievable point for the EU. In the microcosm of this blog WilliamGlen, SouthamObserver, MysticRose, Anabobazinajobabobbaboyscout, RichardNabavi, even Eagles, have criticised the EU heavily in the last 72 hours. However the Beeb try to spin it for now the story will get through to a percentage of the people who care about our EU membership, and not in its favour.

    They've still got kinabalu in their corner. He's batting away in a way that would impress even Geoffrey Boycott.
    Gower. Please.

    I'm from Yorkshire but temperamentally I'm an airy fairy southern wuss.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
    Reading it now, I don't see any connection to the CEO of Pfizer. Looks more like a dark-humoured laugh at the prospect of Israel sending results of medical experiments to company founded by German descendants. The alternative suggestion, that they coughed up, seems plausible.

    Full marks for the creative attempt, but even the person in question didn't try to explain it in that way. So no, that's not what they meant.

    Still, we've moved on from silence to actually talking about this. I guess that's the PB equivalent of going from Corbyn to Starmer. Probably quite a way to to still.
    Sorry, could you point it out to me? And like I said, I see no reference to the CEO.
    Leon said:


    Bless, You think an unexpected early deal between - cough - Israel- - and - cough - Pfizer - was made on the basis of the sharing of medical data?

    Israel. And. Pfizer.

    Hm.

    Or the deal was made because Israel agreed to pay BILLIONS over the odds to secure the global life-raft of the Jewish people? Colour me cynical, but I suspect a large amount of money played a significant role

    I didn't say he mentioned the CEO. I was adding that in for context because it was the only way I could explain the "cough cough" thing.
    Do you not know the form and content of antisemitic tropes? This is pretty classical in its form. I even provided helpful link to the EHRC definition, on two separate occasions to try to alert people to what's happening here.
    I mean, there's even another hint, at the end, right in there with the money stuff, the stuff about "the Jewish people". Cyclefree pointed out the UK has also paid over the odds. But if she's said it terms of "the life-raft of the Anglican community" wouldn't that jump out at you a little bit? Make you think twice?

    I read that post about six times before I commented on it, looking at angles and trying to convince myself there was nothing untoward going on, and I could not. I still cannot.
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I like the fact that most of those calling us xenophobic bigots are complaining at the people who are saying morally it it better to help the third world that european nations.....the thought occurs they are total hypocritical bigots

    I'm not moralising or name calling. I'm just making the point that a nationalistic warrior approach is the wrong one here. It will get in the way.
    But you're wrong and should have the humility to accept you were wrong.

    A "nationalistic warrior approach" is what is needed here. It is what has allowed the UK to pay over the odds to create new vaccine manufacturing to create supplies that didn't previously exist. None of these vaccines just fell in our laps - they've been funded by a "nationalistic warrior mentality" which is what allows them to exist - and allows them to be exported around the globe.

    Thanks to the "nationalistic warrior mentality" there will be more than enough vaccine doses for the UK plus vaccines going to the rest of the globe and Covax for the third world.

    If the EU had adopted more of a "nationalistic warrior mentality" then maybe they'd have paid for some bloody vaccines. How the hell do you think the world can eliminate this damned bloody virus if European countries won't even pay for vaccine development?

    Its a war against the virus. It needs a warrior mentality not just idly waiting for it to be delivered to you at the cheapest rate possible.
    Every single word of this drips with pure unadulterated little englander europhobia. And you pretend to have voted Leave because of the "democratic deficit".

    Busted. Busted beyond redemption.

    Course I knew anyway. Think most with faculties do.
    Bullshit. Learn to fucking read.

    I want the EU to get their chequebook out, pay for some blood vaccines and pay for Covax. That's not phobia.
    I know you drink a *LOT* of coffee but do you drink alcohol as well? Like a few on here you seem to get a bit more lairy and sweary as the night wears on.
    No sorry, just angry at his bullshit and didn't filter it because of the time.

    "Busted beyond redemption" because I want rich countries on this planet to pay for vaccine development and Covax?

    The only thing "busted beyond redemption" is his integrity.
    He's a guy on the internet who you've never met, not Jimmy Savile who fixed it for your best pal's sister when you were knee high to a grasshopper.
    Nah. Kinabalu is miles out of order here. He really has lost the plot the last few days. Something seriously wrong with his moral compass.
    Nevertheless still a guy on the internet who you've never met.
    Not sure why arguing against europhobia and warning about vaccine nationalism is so beyond the pale. Most odd reaction from people. It's like I've removed a Churchill bust from the PB reception or something. ☺
    Because what you are claiming as europhobia and vaccine nationalism is nothing of the sort. You are simply ignoring the facts and making stuff up to suit your own preconceived ideas that anything the EU does must automatically be right and anything the UK does must automatically be wrong. It is a very poor position to take.
    Are you really saying that there has been NO element of europhobia and vaccine nationalism on here over the least few days? That seems as partial a reading as that which you're ascribing to Kinbalu.
    Vaccine nationalism is a good thing and good for the world. The EU needs more of it.

    Europhobia? No, there's been a calling out of a Eurofailing and Eurosclerosis so obvious that even most of its most ardent supporters can see it.

    Just like sometimes Boris gets criticised. I've joined in with criticism of Boris before when something's gone wrong on a UK level. Never considered that to be Anglophobia.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    edited January 2021

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I'm very much enjoying the spectacle of everyone piling onto one poster for saying things that offend their moral sensibilities.

    A few days ago we had actual real life antisemitism being spewed on here, and one person, one, spoke up against it.

    It's informative to know where people draw their lines.

    That was the claim that Israel used money to get ahead in the vaccine game? I'm not sure how that's antisemitic, that's just being clever.
    It wasn't vaccines per se, the insinuation was that Pfizer in particular had some hidden loyalty to Israel. Pfizer has a Jewish CEO.
    If it wasn't clear from just that conflation, the poster actually wrote "Pfizer, Israel, cough cough".

    And when confronted about this, he didn't row back and say "no, of course I didn't mean it that way", his early response was "LOL".
    I don't see the antisemitism in that quote. Perhaps you misinterpreted it?
    Well, I did and I still do. Pretty much the same kind of stuff we've seen some left-wing activists in recent years, but for some reason it's easier to see in those cases.
    Reading it now, I don't see any connection to the CEO of Pfizer. Looks more like a dark-humoured laugh at the prospect of Israel sending results of medical experiments to company founded by German descendants. The alternative suggestion, that they coughed up, seems plausible.

    Full marks for the creative attempt, but even the person in question didn't try to explain it in that way. So no, that's not what they meant.

    Still, we've moved on from silence to actually talking about this. I guess that's the PB equivalent of going from Corbyn to Starmer. Probably quite a way to to still.
    It would be super cool if you could stop throwing around accusations of bigotry (on behalf of others, I am guessing? apologies if not) like a weapon against people you don't like/agree with generally, when they're not obviously warranted. That way, it's easier to make them stick when we actually need to. Cf the Jeremy Corbyn years.

    TIA
This discussion has been closed.