New - I understand @SteveBakerHW has written to the Conservatives Against Racism group, saying the party "urgently need to challenge our own attitude to people taking a knee."
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
New - I understand @SteveBakerHW has written to the Conservatives Against Racism group, saying the party "urgently need to challenge our own attitude to people taking a knee."
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
Anti-maskers cite the Denmark research from last year that suggested that ordinary non-fitted/specialist masks have little efficacy one way or the other.
Are they lying or misinterpreting that survey?
That study is an excellent one: but the first line of it is "To assess whether recommending mask use outside the home reduces wearers' risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection" - and even there it finds them effective (albeit with relatively weak benefits).
The purpose of a mask is to prevent someone with Covid passing it on to others.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
What an altruistic fellow you are. Labelling others selfish and unthinking. But not for you. You are fine. For the not-yet fully vaccinated. Perhaps there were none of those on your ram-packed train?
#Istandwiththenotyetfullyvaccinated.
Well, there's a risk to me as well, of course. (and in this case, more worryingly, to an older member of my family who was travelling with us). As you should know, but most people seem to have forgotten, the vaccines give very good protection, but not complete protection. I'm quite happy to take my reasonable chance on that, because I recognise that we're never going to be 100% safe. So we have to accept some risk, or else we lock ourselves away for ever. The sensible thing is to take those risks combined with reasonable mitigating precautions, most especially those, like compulsory masks on public transport and some other crowded places for the next couple of months or so (until full vaccination protection is near complete), where the cost is very low, the economic impact zero, and no-one's freedom to do whatever activities they want to do is affected. It's frankly a no-brainer.
No I am sorry but you are wrong. The restrictions are causing economic damage. Our economy is still well below full speed and our debt mounting alarmingly
In order for us to generate the wealth that we need to look after the vulnerable, the healthy have to be allowed to go about their business. It's that simple.
Yes, exactly. Of course the restrictions are doing damage. That's exactly why I want to lift them. Masks are one way of doing so more quickly for a given level of risk, with only trivial downside.
Ask @Cocky_cockney about the "trivial downsides" of wearing a mask.
And as to your response earlier, of course vaccines don't give complete protection. Hence my point that to the vaccinated, the effect might be of a bad flu bout. Or other communicable diseases. Not sufficient to continue the restrictions.
No surprise. Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
Maybe because the evidence is that foreign aid doesn't work. Africa has received billions of aid over the last 60 years and things have got much worse in most African countries over that time.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
I wouldn't normally bother to answer such a contemptible post, but I'm finding your lunacy so amusing that I'd like to explore it further.
Run it past me again. What exactly does my support for a short-lived continuation of a modest, low-impact public health measure, mainly on public transport, which is known to save lives and reduce infections by a very nasty disease, and which will disproportionately benefit the as-yet unprotected younger cohorts, have to do with 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges? (Other than perhaps making them more possible?)
No surprise. Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
Maybe because the evidence is that foreign aid doesn't work. Africa has received billions of aid over the last 60 years and things have got much worse in most African countries over that time.
Pathetic.
No serious person would write that “things have got worse”. Look at child mortality, education rates, and absolute poverty levels.
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
They don't work remotely as well as vaccines or FFP3 masks do though.
They've served their purpose and their time has long since passed.
This shows that as an Item of PPE it leaves the user 47 times more likely to catch Covid than someone not in that position.
In every other aspect of H & S, something as uselss as that type of mask would never be accepted as PPE.
What this study also shows is that a FFP3 mask works great and they offered the user full protection i.e an excellent form of PPE .
Now I believe I said this well over a year ago to much derision.
The reason you got derision is because you are an idiot with no understanding of the maths.
The valid comparison to make is a Doctor wearing PPE and a Doctor not wearing PPE in hospital and NOT a comparision to the general public which is meaningless.
I tried this before but you were to thick to understand it last time. You are effectively making the comparison between a scaffolder falling off scaffolding and someone in the general public falling off scaffolding (which they never climb).
OK in the last 10 years 69 scaffolders have died in the UK falling off scaffolding. Guess how many people who have never climbed scaffolding have died falling off it. Well zero obviously.
So a scaffolder is infinitely more at risk than the office worker of dying from falling off scaffolding. But you don't stop scaffolders working because they take precautions and although they are infinitely more at risk the risk is still small.
In a nut shell you are comparing the wrong two things. You need to compare Doctors wearing PPE to Doctors not wearing PPE and not to the general public.
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
They don't work remotely as well as vaccines or FFP3 masks do though.
They've served their purpose and their time has long since passed.
The trouble with masks is that they're rarely worn where they would have the most impact: when indoors in close proximity to others for an extended duration, i.e, at home or in a pub/restaurant with friends and family. Instead, this is where we feel safe enough to take them off.
The relative trajectories of the pandemics in England & Scotland will be interesting....
The other trouble (as I noticed last night on what would normally have been a near-empty train but which was rammed full because the flash floods in London has caused a lot of other trains to be cancelled) is that the people who don't wear masks, even when they are compulsory, are precisely those who absolutely should be wearing them because they are the most likely to be infectious.
Making it voluntary in such circumstances is raving bonkers. On the contrary, we should be enforcing it more stringently.
Alternatively you should get your vaccine.
Or an FFP3 mask.
Don't put your faith in strangers to do your job for you.
Got my vaccine.
Have got FFP3 masks, but was not expecting to need one on this train.
But you are absolutely right. I don't put my faith in all strangers to be responsible. That's exactly why it should be compulsory, not up to random, arrogant, irresponsible 20-year old who is not yet vaccinated, thinks he's invulnerable, and who has been out boozing with his mates so is disproportionately likely to be a danger to others.
Thankfully we don't live in a totalitarian state and I hope we never do.
Which is exactly why if you were bothered you should have been carrying an FFP3 mask. The 20 year old is doing nothing wrong and should back that up.
Err, he and a substantial number of others on what I suspect will be a super-spreader crowded train journey were breaking the law.
And mandating sensible, low-impact precautions to protect lives and reduce the impact a very nasty disease during the worst pandemic in at least 100 years is hardly 'totalitarian'. Don't be daft. It's actually just common sense.
He's only breaking the law if he's not exempt. How do you know he's not exempt? Do you have access to his personal medical history or did you just make a crass assumption about someone else? 🤔
Mask mandates at force of law, where zealots like yourself feel that it should be compelled by force on people who don't want to wear one, who just assume that others aren't medically exempt without knowing anything about other people is not a "sensible, low-impact precaution" it is a high impact one. And the only way to get the law enforced, if people don't want to voluntarily follow the rules, is to be increasingly draconian. And/or to get rid of all the very many exemptions that apply.
C'mon, I'm not a complete fool. Yes, I am quite certain that the vast majority of those not wearing their masks on this crowded train are not exempt. Quite apart from anything else, many of them had masks round their necks or round their chins.
Is it possible that one or two were exempt? Yes, of course. Is it possible that more than that, mostly healthy youngsters, were? No of course it's not. You're not normally this naive, are you?
YOung people have made the calculation that the unpleasantness and alienation of mask wearing are not worth doing considering covid doesn't affect them that much.
And they are correct in that calculation.
If putting a mask on causes them distress then they are exempt and there is no need in the law to show meddling curtain twitching busybodies like Mr Nabavi that.
But we never used to hear about this huge mass of people upset to the point of illness by wearing masks, which are required in many employments.
The implications are
(a) some people simply kept away from these jobs (B) some people are trying it on because they are crybabies or inconsiderate or selfish etc (c) some people have been panicked by the general covid situation (very real issue as someone (Selebian?) suggested was the case for children more generally ion a discussion fo long covid data)
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
They don't work remotely as well as vaccines or FFP3 masks do though.
They've served their purpose and their time has long since passed.
(As an aside I think it’s poor that the British media focus so much on domestic trivia and, if they do international, just touch upon Brussels and Beijing in so far as it affects us, but get massively obsessed by America. There’s a whole world out there.)
If you think our media doesn't do much international news try US media outside CNN
Sure, the US is worse but that's no excuse.
I stopped buying The Economist because I got tired of their BS but at least they tried to report on everywhere.
They don't just try - they do to an extent unmatched by any other newspaper or magazine. No-one else even comes close. And, as a friend of mine who worked there said, the result is a lot of unread articles. But it's why I still bother with it, despite the woke demonizing.
I find to read the Economist from cover to cover ,I have to be abroad on holiday . The combination of time to do it and the international setting I am in seems to match the content. usually in a happy mood on holiday as well which generally matches the Economist's optimism . I think they could expand their arts section a little and have a section on sport (no write ups as such but maybe results and not football centric)
It used to be my cover to cover reading for airports and flights when travelling with business. I miss it - like you, I would never think of picking it up from the local newsagent in normal times. Have to be travelling.
On sports: I used to watch Trans World Sport on Ch4 (usually early on Sunday mornings). It was a great way to keep up with what was happening in sports around the world, including sections on really obscure sports and up-and-coming sports people. Each section short enough to allow me to zone out if it's uninteresting to me.
Sadly, if its still broadcast then I neve seem to catch it ...
Regarding the point made above about a lame duck law. This is a good point.
Are pubs and restaurants really going to enforce the mask rule this weekend? People having their Sunday lunch will be just ten hours away from the rule change.
People having their Sunday lunch will be sitting at tables where they don't need to wear masks....
Further to conversation earlier today about speed limits and pedestrians ... Just doing the school run, not yet at the school I had a child (from a different school about ten I'd guess) step out in front of my car. He was playing keepy-uppies with a football, ball went on road and he ran in front of my car to get it.
Speed limit 30, I'd slowed to 25 already having seen him, managed to stop before hitting him thankfully. Could have been quite different at 40.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
I wouldn't normally bother to answer such a contemptible post, but I'm finding your lunacy so amusing that I'd like to explore it further.
Run it past me again. What exactly does my support for a short-lived continuation of a modest, low-impact public health measure, mainly on public transport, which is known to save lives and reduce infections by a very nasty disease, and which will disproportionately benefit the as-yet unprotected younger cohorts, have to do with 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges? (Other than perhaps making them more possible?)
A whiff of the Modest Proposal about that post. Prejudice posing as rationalism and altruism.
Masks have everything to do with all the above mentioned celebrations because they mostly held in crowded and indoors spaces and so would be subject to the mask mandate. And so young people would continue to have the dreadful time they have had in the past 18 months to suit you.
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
They don't work remotely as well as vaccines or FFP3 masks do though.
They've served their purpose and their time has long since passed.
This shows that as an Item of PPE it leaves the user 47 times more likely to catch Covid than someone not in that position.
In every other aspect of H & S, something as uselss as that type of mask would never be accepted as PPE.
What this study also shows is that a FFP3 mask works great and they offered the user full protection i.e an excellent form of PPE .
Now I believe I said this well over a year ago to much derision.
My post said: "ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON."
Your study isn't about that. It's about the quality of the mask affecting the chance of someone catching it.
I am sorry to be a dick to you, but have you even bothered to read the CDC page that summarises all the research?
Because you've Googled for something completely tangential to the point I'm making. Which is:
MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON
I don't blame you for WRITING IN CAPITALS
This makes me mad, as well. Plenty of apparently intelligent people STILL have not grasped that you wear a mask, any mask, even a cloth gaiter, to prevent you spitting aerosols over OTHERS.
This works. Your cloth gaiter gives you near zero protection from incoming germs, but that is not the damn point; if everyone wears a facial barrier, in crowded trains etc - no matter how flimsy, feeble, badly handled - it can reduce their exhalation of germs by 10%, 20%, 50% - and then it can have a huge affect in slowing spread and lowering R0
No surprise. Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
Maybe because the evidence is that foreign aid doesn't work. Africa has received billions of aid over the last 60 years and things have got much worse in most African countries over that time.
Pathetic.
No serious person would write that “things have got worse”. Look at child mortality, education rates, and absolute poverty levels.
It is acknowledged that the MDG were partially successful in saving lives but there remain big questions about foreign aid, notably articluated by Easterly, Boyo, et al.
For a sharp end treatise on especially crisis/humanitarian aid read Linda Polman.
Cloth masks around people's necks don't work. If they did the pandemic would have been over before the second wave began.
Vaccines work. Properly fitted FFP3 masks work.
The vaccines are available and there's no shortage of PPE available to buy to protect yourself if you're bothered beyond that. Its time we stop putting faith in cloth masks that are uncomfortable and not working.
At last a post that accepts that cloth masks have not worked, if they did work our case numbers would not be anything like they are.
Cloth masks = gaiters. And not only that, but even these show some (albeit relatively weak) efficacy.
There has been an enormous amount of academic work produced during this pandemic on the efficacy of masks. Literally, dozens of paper, looking at the effects of transmission.
ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON.
Why don't you see if you can find a single study, that proves the opposite. And when you've done you can post it here.
You demonstrate some kind of extraordinary wilful ignorance. Is it a gift?
They don't work remotely as well as vaccines or FFP3 masks do though.
They've served their purpose and their time has long since passed.
This shows that as an Item of PPE it leaves the user 47 times more likely to catch Covid than someone not in that position.
In every other aspect of H & S, something as uselss as that type of mask would never be accepted as PPE.
What this study also shows is that a FFP3 mask works great and they offered the user full protection i.e an excellent form of PPE .
Now I believe I said this well over a year ago to much derision.
My post said: "ALL OF THEM SHOW THAT MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON."
Your study isn't about that. It's about the quality of the mask affecting the chance of someone catching it.
I am sorry to be a dick to you, but have you even bothered to read the CDC page that summarises all the research?
Because you've Googled for something completely tangential to the point I'm making. Which is:
MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON
And they are considerate to other people. Except, ironically, the common kind of FFP3 which has an exhalant flap valve ...
It should be recognised though that masks are not as cost-free as their exponents would claim. Masks inhibit economic activity. The leisure industry, for example, will struggle to get going again while compelling people to wear masks to take part in their leisure activity. Because a significant proportion of people will choose to spend their leisure time doing something where they don't have to wear masks. How great an issue this is I don't know. But I for one am going to be spending less money in places I have to wear a mask to do so. This isn't out of spite or principle, it's just because I want to spend my leisure time doing something I enjoy, and wearing a mask will reduce the pleasure often to a point where it's just not worth bothering. I'll still continue to wear a mask where required to in, say, Tesco's. Because I need food to live and don't expect to enjoy the experience. But I'm not going to wear a mask to, say, go ten pin bowling - I just won't bother.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
I wouldn't normally bother to answer such a contemptible post, but I'm finding your lunacy so amusing that I'd like to explore it further.
Run it past me again. What exactly does my support for a short-lived continuation of a modest, low-impact public health measure, mainly on public transport, which is known to save lives and reduce infections by a very nasty disease, and which will disproportionately benefit the as-yet unprotected younger cohorts, have to do with 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges? (Other than perhaps making them more possible?)
A whiff of the Modest Proposal about that post. Prejudice posing as rationalism and altruism.
Masks have everything to do with all the above mentioned celebrations because they mostly held in crowded and indoors spaces and so would be subject to the mask mandate. And so young people would continue to have the dreadful time they have had in the past 18 months to suit you.
Its just a Modest Proposal though right?
Disappointing. I was hoping you'd come up with something more amusing than an argument based on something unrelated to anything I've proposed.
Further to conversation earlier today about speed limits and pedestrians ... Just doing the school run, not yet at the school I had a child (from a different school about ten I'd guess) step out in front of my car. He was playing keepy-uppies with a football, ball went on road and he ran in front of my car to get it.
Speed limit 30, I'd slowed to 25 already having seen him, managed to stop before hitting him thankfully. Could have been quite different at 40.
Bloody hell well done - could have been a shocker.
I still remember 20 years ago, as if it was in slow motion, driving along the A3 in Clapham, keeping up with traffic, when a child ran out between parked cars in front of me and was grabbed (a la Chiellini/Saka) by a parent. Had the parent not been there I would have hit him without any doubt whatsoever.
Further to conversation earlier today about speed limits and pedestrians ... Just doing the school run, not yet at the school I had a child (from a different school about ten I'd guess) step out in front of my car. He was playing keepy-uppies with a football, ball went on road and he ran in front of my car to get it.
Speed limit 30, I'd slowed to 25 already having seen him, managed to stop before hitting him thankfully. Could have been quite different at 40.
Bloody hell well done - could have been a shocker.
I still remember 20 years ago, as if it was in slow motion, driving along the A3 in Clapham, keeping up with traffic, when a child ran out between parked cars in front of me and was grabbed (a la Chiellini/Saka) by a parent. Had the parent not been there I would have hit him without any doubt whatsoever.
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
Further to conversation earlier today about speed limits and pedestrians ... Just doing the school run, not yet at the school I had a child (from a different school about ten I'd guess) step out in front of my car. He was playing keepy-uppies with a football, ball went on road and he ran in front of my car to get it.
Speed limit 30, I'd slowed to 25 already having seen him, managed to stop before hitting him thankfully. Could have been quite different at 40.
Bloody hell well done - could have been a shocker.
I still remember 20 years ago, as if it was in slow motion, driving along the A3 in Clapham, keeping up with traffic, when a child ran out between parked cars in front of me and was grabbed (a la Chiellini/Saka) by a parent. Had the parent not been there I would have hit him without any doubt whatsoever.
I think there is near zero chance of a Labour majority in 2023/24 but there is a significant chance of Starmer becoming PM in a hung parliament if Labour win back a few Red Wall seats and the LDs pick up enough Tory Remain seats like Chesham and Amersham in the South.
On that basis Starmer could become UK PM with LD and SNP support even if the Tories still win most seats and even if Boris wins a Tory majority in England again.
Boris would easily be re elected as PM of England, however as PM of the UK his re election is much less certain
Also should be noted the DUP would likely now abstain rather than prop up Boris as they propped up May in 2017 after he put a border in the Irish Sea and Starmer said he opposed a United Ireland unlike Corbyn.
To stay PM after the next general election Boris therefore has to win another overall majority
I don't think that is quite right. Whilst Mike is right that no other party is likely to want to go into coalition with the Conservatives led by Boris, it doesn't follow that in a hung parliament where he narrowly misses getting a majority that there will be any other viable alternative coalition or arrangement. A very weak, probably short-lived, Tory minority government might be the only possibility in such a scenario.
Possibly but it would have to be SF that has the balance of power in that scenario ie the Tories very close to an overall majority anyway and SF refuse still to take their seats.
Otherwise Boris could find he faces the fate of the Nationals Bill English in New Zealand in 2017, the Conservatives win most seats but Starmer like Ardern gets Labour into power by backroom deals with other parties
Backroom deals with the SNP, PC, the LibDems, maybe a Green or two, AND the DUP all at the same time would be very challenging. It requires the parties simultaneously to think such deals are in their interests, but their interests are conflicting.
Plus such a deal would leave the PM impotent on English only matters where the SNP would abstain (and Westminster disorder is good news for the SNP).
Labour could benefit more from leaving a wounded Tory government on its last legs reliant upon the DUP before getting put out of its misery at the next election. As could have happened in 2017 had the Opposition not played into the Tories internal opposition's hands.
Not if the Tories scrap EVEL as Gove wants it wouldn't, then Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs could and would vote on English domestic legislation if that was part of an SNP deal with Starmer in return for devomax and indyref2.
As I said the DUP will not support the Tories again unless and until they remove the Irish Sea border
The SNP would abstain on English matters. They always have done, plus if the Labour government is incompetent and can't get votes through Parliament then the SNP can keep demanding a price to be paid.
If a second referendum is already on the cards, which would be a prerequisite before a Queens Speech even, then having Westminster shown to be not working is good news for the SNP not bad news. They have no incentive to vote on English only matters once the bill has been passed for a referendum.
The SNP lies about that
For example in the last parliament the SNP voted against a proposal to extend shop opening hours in England. They came up with some excuse as to why it would impact Scotland but it was tenuous
(As an aside I think it’s poor that the British media focus so much on domestic trivia and, if they do international, just touch upon Brussels and Beijing in so far as it affects us, but get massively obsessed by America. There’s a whole world out there.)
If you think our media doesn't do much international news try US media outside CNN
Sure, the US is worse but that's no excuse.
I stopped buying The Economist because I got tired of their BS but at least they tried to report on everywhere.
They don't just try - they do to an extent unmatched by any other newspaper or magazine. No-one else even comes close. And, as a friend of mine who worked there said, the result is a lot of unread articles. But it's why I still bother with it, despite the woke demonizing.
I find to read the Economist from cover to cover ,I have to be abroad on holiday . The combination of time to do it and the international setting I am in seems to match the content. usually in a happy mood on holiday as well which generally matches the Economist's optimism . I think they could expand their arts section a little and have a section on sport (no write ups as such but maybe results and not football centric)
It used to be my cover to cover reading for airports and flights when travelling with business. I miss it - like you, I would never think of picking it up from the local newsagent in normal times. Have to be travelling.
On sports: I used to watch Trans World Sport on Ch4 (usually early on Sunday mornings). It was a great way to keep up with what was happening in sports around the world, including sections on really obscure sports and up-and-coming sports people. Each section short enough to allow me to zone out if it's uninteresting to me.
Sadly, if its still broadcast then I neve seem to catch it ...
Surprised they haven’t changed the name given the current cultural zeitgeist surrounding the first word in their name
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
I wouldn't normally bother to answer such a contemptible post, but I'm finding your lunacy so amusing that I'd like to explore it further.
Run it past me again. What exactly does my support for a short-lived continuation of a modest, low-impact public health measure, mainly on public transport, which is known to save lives and reduce infections by a very nasty disease, and which will disproportionately benefit the as-yet unprotected younger cohorts, have to do with 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges? (Other than perhaps making them more possible?)
Except that mandatory mask-wearing is neither modest nor low-impact, despite your repeated false claims that it is.
Already today its breaking down as people aren't willing to follow the rules, quite reasonably too as when the rules an ass people cease to follow them.
So your solution rather than to realise mandatory mask wearing is no longer viable is to be more draconian in the enforcement instead. Draconian enforcement is not low-impact.
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?
If you're not going to be totalitarian, if people aren't willing to wear masks, then the law becomes useless and counterproductive. You need to keep raising the stakes and high impact enforcement otherwise. Or it is quite rightly time to do away with it.
...For his colleague Walter Oppenheimer, Sunday – and indeed the path that had led to the final – revealed some deeper truths about England as both a team and a country.
“What happens with England when it comes to football happens with other things, too,” wrote Oppenheimer. “While it is a powerful, advanced and often generous country, '[and] a pioneer in disciplines from science to art and thought, it is also a petulant country, incapable of accepting its limitations.”
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
I just don't believe Labour are on as low as 30%. Again it is the difference between pollsters.
The old rule of thumb was take the loqest labour nunber across pollsters, but i don't believe this figure
Nor do I But I do get fed up of the assumption that a big change has occurred which has the Tories doomed - the polls don't show it, local elections don't show it. C & A clearly was a warning shot but we've been down that path many times before without a LD government emerging.
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?.
Well, we could try modest fines first, or denying access. How do we enforce any laws?
Or we could rely on the fact that most people would be law-abiding, if the messaging weren't all over the place.
MPs voted by 333 to 298 to set new fiscal hurdles before Ministers need again spend 0.7% of GNI on overseas aid. Govt victory. Time will tell if any damage done to reputation of Global Britain or Conservatives, but a reordering of UK foreign policy that may echo round the world. https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1414963664285847556
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?.
Well, we could try modest fines first, or denying access. How do we enforce any laws?
We've done that already, that's the existing law. Its not working.
Plus anyone who wants to not wear one can claim "distress" and they're suddenly exempt, there is no requirement to prove that it causes distress.
There is nothing magic about 0.5% or 0.7% of GDP. People who believe in competent and responsible government think when you do things, you should do them properly. This includes winding up programmes. You should not wreck the programme in the search of a cheap headline.
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
...For his colleague Walter Oppenheimer, Sunday – and indeed the path that had led to the final – revealed some deeper truths about England as both a team and a country.
“What happens with England when it comes to football happens with other things, too,” wrote Oppenheimer. “While it is a powerful, advanced and often generous country, '[and] a pioneer in disciplines from science to art and thought, it is also a petulant country, incapable of accepting its limitations.”
Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.....Hooliganism and overt racism towards players (any by players) is far worse in most European countries.
For instance, I could link to so many stories of monkey chants at players during Italian games.
No surprise. Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
Do you not concede that this poll supports the reduction in foreign aid across all political groups and ages
I don’t believe in running the country according to whatever lowest-denominator impulses can be discerned from polling.
Sad that this is another example of your piously refusing to part with a smidgeon of your triple-locked wealth.
Ah yes
"I have morality on my side. Plus all the proper politicians. I don't need the Head Count"
The problem is that if you leave out the "persuade the people of the justice of your cause" bit.. well, in a democracy, they will find *someone* to vote for...
MPs voted by 333 to 298 to set new fiscal hurdles before Ministers need again spend 0.7% of GNI on overseas aid. Govt victory. Time will tell if any damage done to reputation of Global Britain or Conservatives, but a reordering of UK foreign policy that may echo round the world. https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1414963664285847556
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
There is nothing magic about 0.5% or 0.7% of GDP. People who believe in competent and responsible government think when you do things, you should do them properly. This includes winding up programmes. You should not wreck the programme in the search of a cheap headline.
The programmes aren't being wrecked, others are stepping into the void.
Andrew Mitchell was on Sky earlier bemoaning how "embarrassing" it is that a program previously funded by Britain is now funded by Bill Gates instead.
That's not embarrassing to me. If Bill Gates wants to use his vast wealth to ensure that program continues then good for him, if nobody else does the program probably wasn't worth doing.
MPs voted by 333 to 298 to set new fiscal hurdles before Ministers need again spend 0.7% of GNI on overseas aid. Govt victory. Time will tell if any damage done to reputation of Global Britain or Conservatives, but a reordering of UK foreign policy that may echo round the world. https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1414963664285847556
So Boris has got his overseas aid cut through, despite the opposition of May and some of her and Cameron's allies still in Parliament.
Despite the smaller government majority of 35 compared to their actual majority of 80 this is the clearest indication yet this Parliament of where Boris has broken with the May and Cameron years in favour of the views of Leavers and the Red Wall
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
I know what you mean, but none of the other figures looks implausible. Maybe some of the Green support would drift to Lab or LD in a real GE.
Fair to say that if Greens poll 5% let alone 7% it's really hard to find a path for Starmer to Number 10. The Greens really could be on the cusp of a breakthrough in places like Bristol & Norwich if they're on 7% and Starmer can't win round the students and graduates.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
YOU half witted cretin , we did not have money or time to waste in those days , we were too busy working our socks off to live. Today's pampered jessie's would not have lasted in those days. Out and get a proper job you slacker.
No surprise. Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
Do you not concede that this poll supports the reduction in foreign aid across all political groups and ages
I don’t believe in running the country according to whatever lowest-denominator impulses can be discerned from polling.
Sad that this is another example of your piously refusing to part with a smidgeon of your triple-locked wealth.
Ah yes
"I have morality on my side. Plus all the proper politicians. I don't need the Head Count"
The problem is that if you leave out the "persuade the people of the justice of your cause" bit.. well, in a democracy, they will find *someone* to vote for...
The other problem is he is wrong in so far as I have always supported ending the triple lock
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
Take it you aren't a Sturgeon fan...
At last! At last! another PBer with the sentience and intelligence to grasp that not everyone who wants independence for Scotland is a 'nationalist' in whatever sense, or even a SNP voter, let alone follower of any particular leader.
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Is it just me or is the covid dashboard not updating hospital admissions? Mine still has figure from 7th July.
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
No one in the government will be brave enough to say it, but if the vaccines aren't working, then we have to get on with it.
Right now that Tory vote is really firm, it hasn’t dipped below 39% since January. When events occur like Cummings or Hancock they tend to be temporary blips. Labour need a right wing party like BXP or Reform in the mix because when it comes to an election fought on cultural issues Conservative voters only have one obvious home, and if they only manage 39% that will still probably hand them a reasonable majority.
Actually figures of Tories 39%, Labour 35% and LDs 12% would see a hung parliament with the Tories 17 short
I just don't believe Labour are on as low as 30%. Again it is the difference between pollsters.
The old rule of thumb was take the loqest labour nunber across pollsters, but i don't believe this figure
It is the absurdly high Green figure of 7% which makes the difference in Yougov polls, to put into context that would be 3 times the Green voteshare in 2019 and certainly in marginal seats I would expect most of that Green vote to go Labour or LD even if some Corbynites still cast a protest vote in safe Labour or safe Tory seats for the Greens
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Pedant in me has to point out - 50 deaths reported today (after only 6 reported yesterday).
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?.
Well, we could try modest fines first, or denying access. How do we enforce any laws?
We've done that already, that's the existing law. Its not working.
Plus anyone who wants to not wear one can claim "distress" and they're suddenly exempt, there is no requirement to prove that it causes distress.
So now what do you try next?
As I just said in my edit to the last post, the government has screwed up the messaging, so I agree that it may be too late now. All that 'Freedom Day' garbage was the usual Boris government-by-wishful-thinking, and as a result the situation is again worse than it needed to be. A very large number of people are going to be nastily ill as a result, a fairly large number will be hospitalised, and some of those will die. The NHS is going to be unnecessarily stretched, with all the knock-on effects of that. The government may even be forced, again, to U-turn and impose more restrictions.
But there we are, that's the cost of dithering, bad decisions, and government confusion.
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
It is what we expect from nationalists really. The choice for nationalist voters/English haters north of the border might be one bunch led by folk that are under investigation for fraud, or a minnow party led by a man who was described by his own QC as a "bully and a sex pest". And they try and make out the Tories are sleazy! British National Party or Scottish National Party. In the end they both amount to the same. Racists and sleaze bags, mostly!
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Is it just me or is the covid dashboard not updating hospital admissions? Mine still has figure from 7th July.
That part of the dashboard has always been slow. There are other ways to get more accurate data (can't link 'cos can't remember them...)
There is nothing magic about 0.5% or 0.7% of GDP. People who believe in competent and responsible government think when you do things, you should do them properly. This includes winding up programmes. You should not wreck the programme in the search of a cheap headline.
The programmes aren't being wrecked, others are stepping into the void.
Andrew Mitchell was on Sky earlier bemoaning how "embarrassing" it is that a program previously funded by Britain is now funded by Bill Gates instead.
That's not embarrassing to me. If Bill Gates wants to use his vast wealth to ensure that program continues then good for him, if nobody else does the program probably wasn't worth doing.
Some spin there. Gates et al stepped in to mitigate a small part of the damage.
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?.
Well, we could try modest fines first, or denying access. How do we enforce any laws?
We've done that already, that's the existing law. Its not working.
Plus anyone who wants to not wear one can claim "distress" and they're suddenly exempt, there is no requirement to prove that it causes distress.
So now what do you try next?
As I just said in my edit to the last post, the government has screwed up the messaging, so I agree that it may be too late now. All that 'Freedom Day' garbage was the usual Boris government-by-wishful-thinking, and as a result the situation is again worse than it needed to be. A very large number of people are going to be nastily ill as a result, a fairly large number will be hospitalised, and some of those will die. The NHS is going to be unnecessarily stretched, with all the knock-on effects of that. The government may even be forced, again, to U-turn and impose more restrictions.
But there we are, that's the cost of dithering, bad decisions, and government confusion.
Except the "freedom day" stuff came from the media and quite right too. Its time for freedoms to be restored not keep going on with curtain twitching, nannying bollocks.
If people get ill they get ill. So be it. Everyone should step forward for their vaccine and anyone exceptionally bothered should wear an FFP3 mask or shield. Otherwise its time to get back to normal.
Restoring our freedoms is a good one not a bad, dithering one. Only in an emergency should we have restrictions and we're not in an emergency anymore.
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
It is what we expect from nationalists really. The choice for nationalist voters/English haters north of the border might be one bunch led by folk that are under investigation for fraud, or a minnow party led by a man who was described by his own QC as a "bully and a sex pest". And they try and make out the Tories are sleazy! British National Party or Scottish National Party. In the end they both amount to the same. Racists and sleaze bags, mostly!
Can you really not tell the difference between
(a) hating the English and (b) not wanting to be ruled by them?
That's on a par with regarding the Unitarians as anti-Tory because they don't support the C of E or its rule by HMTQ.
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Is it just me or is the covid dashboard not updating hospital admissions? Mine still has figure from 7th July.
You're right, it isn't. That's a long way behind. We really need up to date information on that.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
YOU half witted cretin , we did not have money or time to waste in those days , we were too busy working our socks off to live. Today's pampered jessie's would not have lasted in those days. Out and get a proper job you slacker.
.....Oh we used to DREAM of living in a corridor.....
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
I tell you what if you got a vaccine jab it might speed up the release of those young people a smidging.
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Scottish numbers looking better
Schools skailed earlier, likewise footie - hopefully a harbinger of a similar fall down south.
There is nothing magic about 0.5% or 0.7% of GDP. People who believe in competent and responsible government think when you do things, you should do them properly. This includes winding up programmes. You should not wreck the programme in the search of a cheap headline.
The programmes aren't being wrecked, others are stepping into the void.
Andrew Mitchell was on Sky earlier bemoaning how "embarrassing" it is that a program previously funded by Britain is now funded by Bill Gates instead.
That's not embarrassing to me. If Bill Gates wants to use his vast wealth to ensure that program continues then good for him, if nobody else does the program probably wasn't worth doing.
Some spin there. Gates et al stepped in to mitigate a small part of the damage.
Good. A free aid market in action.
We don't need the state getting involved there.
Personally I think there should never be a percentage of GNI commitment, and if there is it should include any private donations too. Currently we're paying "charities" taxes to then advertise on TV begging for donations. 🤔
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
It is what we expect from nationalists really. The choice for nationalist voters/English haters north of the border might be one bunch led by folk that are under investigation for fraud, or a minnow party led by a man who was described by his own QC as a "bully and a sex pest". And they try and make out the Tories are sleazy! British National Party or Scottish National Party. In the end they both amount to the same. Racists and sleaze bags, mostly!
Can you really not tell the difference between
(a) hating the English and (b) not wanting to be ruled by them?
That's on a par with regarding the Unitarians as anti-Tory because they don't support the C of E or its rule by HMTQ.
Carnyx, he is a nasty bellend , a Scottish hater and to be pitied rather than chastised.
If you have had the vaccine Richard then the risk to you is similar to a bad case of the flu, isn't it? Or chicken pox, or one of several communicable diseases, none of which we mandate special behaviour for on public transport.
It's not the risk to me particularly; most of the bad effects of the coming, unnecessarily bad, third wave are going to be amongst the not-yet fully vaccinated, which is around 15 million people.
The NFV know the risks and they can now make informed choices.
Many of them are young people, who are much less affected by covid than 83 year olds with co-morbidities.
You want to deny them the rites of passage, the joys of youth and the uninterrupted education you enjoyed as a young person.
Eh? How in the name of heaven did you come up with that utterly bonkers last sentence?
Sorry where have you been for the last 18 months?
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
YOU half witted cretin , we did not have money or time to waste in those days , we were too busy working our socks off to live. Today's pampered jessie's would not have lasted in those days. Out and get a proper job you slacker.
.....Oh we used to DREAM of living in a corridor.....
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
No one in the government will be brave enough to say it, but if the vaccines aren't working, then we have to get on with it.
Repost this from previous thread. Vaccines are a huge success but they don't provide total protection, and more importantly, we are making the decision, consciously or by default, to remove controls while the coverage is only partial.
This is the key point about Covid policy when you are no longer attempting to keep R less than 1. You are by default allowing Covid to infect as many people as it can and hoping that not too much damage will happen to those it reaches.
Many people now seem OK with R greater than 1 in countries with relatively high vaccination % (at least implicitly, given they aren’t advocating for the strong measures required to guarantee R less than 1). Given R greater than 1, much of Europe faces large epidemics likely to end with accumulation of immunity in next few months - much of it from infections. Reopening would accelerate this, but won't be difference between epidemic & no epidemic (unlike, say, reintroducing measures to get R less than 1)
There is nothing magic about 0.5% or 0.7% of GDP. People who believe in competent and responsible government think when you do things, you should do them properly. This includes winding up programmes. You should not wreck the programme in the search of a cheap headline.
The programmes aren't being wrecked, others are stepping into the void.
Andrew Mitchell was on Sky earlier bemoaning how "embarrassing" it is that a program previously funded by Britain is now funded by Bill Gates instead.
That's not embarrassing to me. If Bill Gates wants to use his vast wealth to ensure that program continues then good for him, if nobody else does the program probably wasn't worth doing.
Some spin there. Gates et al stepped in to mitigate a small part of the damage.
Good. A free aid market in action.
We don't need the state getting involved there.
Personally I think there should never be a percentage of GNI commitment, and if there is it should include any private donations too. Currently we're paying "charities" taxes to then advertise on TV begging for donations. 🤔
Abolish tax relied on charitable donations too, income and inheritance taxes both. But that would mean political parties, particularly those favoured by elderly wealthy people in expensive houses, would suffer.
50 deaths today, up 50% in the last 7 days. Hospital admissions also up 50% in the same time. The rate of increase of new cases is slowing a bit but these are not great figures, especially when vaccinations are down to 175k.
Deaths and hospitalisations kind of reflecting the uptick two and three weeks ago. Not great, but not unexpected. Where does this top out? Not too far off on positives, hopefully.
MPs voted by 333 to 298 to set new fiscal hurdles before Ministers need again spend 0.7% of GNI on overseas aid. Govt victory. Time will tell if any damage done to reputation of Global Britain or Conservatives, but a reordering of UK foreign policy that may echo round the world. https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1414963664285847556
So Boris has got his overseas aid cut through, despite the opposition of May and some of her and Cameron's allies still in Parliament.
Despite the smaller government majority of 35 compared to their actual majority of 80 this is the clearest indication yet this Parliament of where Boris has broken with the May and Cameron years in favour of the views of Leavers and the Red Wall
How Royal Caribbean is getting round navigating Florida's "no vaccine passport" law:
All of this means you should plan to spend at least an extra $700 for an unvaccinated family of four -- even before you get on the ship and consider onboard temptations...
POLICE Scotland have launched a formal investigation into potential criminality involving SNP fundraising.
The force, which has been assessing a fraud allegation from a member of the public since late March, said it had escalated its work after consulting with prosecutors.
Where are Pete and the magpie hiding, the vultures are circling Murrell Towers. Will some try to save their own skins or will they choose to go down with the Ceaușescu's.
It is what we expect from nationalists really. The choice for nationalist voters/English haters north of the border might be one bunch led by folk that are under investigation for fraud, or a minnow party led by a man who was described by his own QC as a "bully and a sex pest". And they try and make out the Tories are sleazy! British National Party or Scottish National Party. In the end they both amount to the same. Racists and sleaze bags, mostly!
Can you really not tell the difference between
(a) hating the English and (b) not wanting to be ruled by them?
That's on a par with regarding the Unitarians as anti-Tory because they don't support the C of E or its rule by HMTQ.
To be fair to you Mr. Carnyx, you, unlike the other usual suspects on here seem a thoroughly decent chap(ess?). It is fair to say that it is quite possible to believe in Scottish independence without being a strutting angry English hater, in the same way as it is possible to be a Leave voter without being a xenophobe. The problem for both supporters of independence and Leavers who do not fit the stereotype is the company they keep!
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?.
Well, we could try modest fines first, or denying access. How do we enforce any laws?
We've done that already, that's the existing law. Its not working.
Plus anyone who wants to not wear one can claim "distress" and they're suddenly exempt, there is no requirement to prove that it causes distress.
So now what do you try next?
As I just said in my edit to the last post, the government has screwed up the messaging, so I agree that it may be too late now. All that 'Freedom Day' garbage was the usual Boris government-by-wishful-thinking, and as a result the situation is again worse than it needed to be. A very large number of people are going to be nastily ill as a result, a fairly large number will be hospitalised, and some of those will die. The NHS is going to be unnecessarily stretched, with all the knock-on effects of that. The government may even be forced, again, to U-turn and impose more restrictions.
But there we are, that's the cost of dithering, bad decisions, and government confusion.
"A very large number of people are going to be nastily ill as a result, a fairly large number will be hospitalised, and some of those will die."
Not sufficient to impose restrictions by law, no matter how "trivial". You have slightly lost perspective in this, Richard.
Comments
Britons are curtain-twitching, Mail-reading, spite-mongers. Who hate freedom (especially other people’s).
"I fear we are in danger of misrepresenting our own heart for those who suffer injustice."
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/1414952830306340869
Young people I know have had to forego 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges.
Rites of passage and part and parcel of growing up in the UK in the post war period. Until now.
You telling me you didn't have these when you were young and don't treasure the memories now?
You selfish, selfish, contemptible, callous old f8ck.
The purpose of a mask is to prevent someone with Covid passing it on to others.
"Racist football fans? This is a moral panic
Someone has to say it: the problem of racism in football has been massively blown out of proportion."
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/07/13/racist-football-fans-this-is-a-moral-panic/
And as to your response earlier, of course vaccines don't give complete protection. Hence my point that to the vaccinated, the effect might be of a bad flu bout. Or other communicable diseases. Not sufficient to continue the restrictions.
Is interesting to watch
For example:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/02/as-a-system-foreign-aid-is-a-fraud-and-does-nothing-for-inequality
Run it past me again. What exactly does my support for a short-lived continuation of a modest, low-impact public health measure, mainly on public transport, which is known to save lives and reduce infections by a very nasty disease, and which will disproportionately benefit the as-yet unprotected younger cohorts, have to do with 18th birthdays, 21st birthdays, graduation parties, school dinner dances , Freshers dos, casual meetings with friends, all manner of sporting events and challenges? (Other than perhaps making them more possible?)
No serious person would write that “things have got worse”. Look at child mortality, education rates, and absolute poverty levels.
The valid comparison to make is a Doctor wearing PPE and a Doctor not wearing PPE in hospital and NOT a comparision to the general public which is meaningless.
I tried this before but you were to thick to understand it last time. You are effectively making the comparison between a scaffolder falling off scaffolding and someone in the general public falling off scaffolding (which they never climb).
OK in the last 10 years 69 scaffolders have died in the UK falling off scaffolding. Guess how many people who have never climbed scaffolding have died falling off it. Well zero obviously.
So a scaffolder is infinitely more at risk than the office worker of dying from falling off scaffolding. But you don't stop scaffolders working because they take precautions and although they are infinitely more at risk the risk is still small.
In a nut shell you are comparing the wrong two things. You need to compare Doctors wearing PPE to Doctors not wearing PPE and not to the general public.
How is it you don't get this?
Your study isn't about that. It's about the quality of the mask affecting the chance of someone catching it.
I am sorry to be a dick to you, but have you even bothered to read the CDC page that summarises all the research?
Because you've Googled for something completely tangential to the point I'm making. Which is:
MASKS ACHIEVE THEIR PRIMARY PURPOSE - I.E. THEY PREVENT SOMEONE WITH COVID PASSING IT ON
The implications are
(a) some people simply kept away from these jobs
(B) some people are trying it on because they are crybabies or inconsiderate or selfish etc
(c) some people have been panicked by the general covid situation (very real issue as someone (Selebian?) suggested was the case for children more generally ion a discussion fo long covid data)
What was the balance? I don't know.
Speed limit 30, I'd slowed to 25 already having seen him, managed to stop before hitting him thankfully. Could have been quite different at 40.
William Hague" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/want-to-get-ahead-get-back-to-the-office-30bnbv77s
Masks have everything to do with all the above mentioned celebrations because they mostly held in crowded and indoors spaces and so would be subject to the mask mandate. And so young people would continue to have the dreadful time they have had in the past 18 months to suit you.
Its just a Modest Proposal though right?
This makes me mad, as well. Plenty of apparently intelligent people STILL have not grasped that you wear a mask, any mask, even a cloth gaiter, to prevent you spitting aerosols over OTHERS.
This works. Your cloth gaiter gives you near zero protection from incoming germs, but that is not the damn point;
if everyone wears a facial barrier, in crowded trains etc - no matter how flimsy, feeble, badly handled - it can reduce their exhalation of germs by 10%, 20%, 50% - and then it can have a huge affect in slowing spread and lowering R0
For a sharp end treatise on especially crisis/humanitarian aid read Linda Polman.
Their lead story now....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9783815/South-African-looters-raid-Durban-warehouses-riots-escalate.html
- New cases: 7,888
- Average: 7,472 (+805)
- In hospital: 204 (-9)
- In ICU: 75 (-9)
- New deaths: 3
I'll still continue to wear a mask where required to in, say, Tesco's. Because I need food to live and don't expect to enjoy the experience. But I'm not going to wear a mask to, say, go ten pin bowling - I just won't bother.
I still remember 20 years ago, as if it was in slow motion, driving along the A3 in Clapham, keeping up with traffic, when a child ran out between parked cars in front of me and was grabbed (a la Chiellini/Saka) by a parent. Had the parent not been there I would have hit him without any doubt whatsoever.
https://unherd.com/2021/07/the-wests-cultural-revolution-is-over/
"The West’s cultural revolution is over
The return of censorship, speech codes and taboos suggests society returning to normal
By Ed West"
BBC - "Third of people in England still susceptible to Covid"
The reality is we are all susceptible to COVID, the question is what that actually means.
@BritainElects
·
4h
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 42% (-)
LAB: 30% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
GRN: 7% (+1)
REFUK: 2% (-1)
via @YouGov
, 07 - 08 Jul
Chgs. w/ 30 Jun
The old rule of thumb was take the loqest labour nunber across pollsters, but i don't believe this figure
Sad that this is another example of your piously refusing to part with a smidgeon of your triple-locked wealth.
Already today its breaking down as people aren't willing to follow the rules, quite reasonably too as when the rules an ass people cease to follow them.
So your solution rather than to realise mandatory mask wearing is no longer viable is to be more draconian in the enforcement instead. Draconian enforcement is not low-impact.
How are you going to deal with the growing amounts of people who don't want to wear a mask and will claim "distress" or other reasons as a reason to not wear one? A bullet in the back of the head of anyone not wearing a mask? Six month imprisonment?
If you're not going to be totalitarian, if people aren't willing to wear masks, then the law becomes useless and counterproductive. You need to keep raising the stakes and high impact enforcement otherwise. Or it is quite rightly time to do away with it.
...For his colleague Walter Oppenheimer, Sunday – and indeed the path that had led to the final – revealed some deeper truths about England as both a team and a country.
“What happens with England when it comes to football happens with other things, too,” wrote Oppenheimer. “While it is a powerful, advanced and often generous country, '[and] a pioneer in disciplines from science to art and thought, it is also a petulant country, incapable of accepting its limitations.”
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/jul/13/england-euro-2020-chaos-wembley-european-press-review
Or we could rely on the fact that most people would be law-abiding, if the messaging weren't all over the place.
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1414963664285847556
I have posted on countless occasions that I think the triple lock must go, and my wife and I would be affected
Maybe an apology would be the correct response
Plus anyone who wants to not wear one can claim "distress" and they're suddenly exempt, there is no requirement to prove that it causes distress.
So now what do you try next?
For instance, I could link to so many stories of monkey chants at players during Italian games.
"I have morality on my side. Plus all the proper politicians. I don't need the Head Count"
The problem is that if you leave out the "persuade the people of the justice of your cause" bit.. well, in a democracy, they will find *someone* to vote for...
Andrew Mitchell was on Sky earlier bemoaning how "embarrassing" it is that a program previously funded by Britain is now funded by Bill Gates instead.
That's not embarrassing to me. If Bill Gates wants to use his vast wealth to ensure that program continues then good for him, if nobody else does the program probably wasn't worth doing.
Despite the smaller government majority of 35 compared to their actual majority of 80 this is the clearest indication yet this Parliament of where Boris has broken with the May and Cameron years in favour of the views of Leavers and the Red Wall
I am awaiting an apology
But there we are, that's the cost of dithering, bad decisions, and government confusion.
If people get ill they get ill. So be it. Everyone should step forward for their vaccine and anyone exceptionally bothered should wear an FFP3 mask or shield. Otherwise its time to get back to normal.
Restoring our freedoms is a good one not a bad, dithering one. Only in an emergency should we have restrictions and we're not in an emergency anymore.
(a) hating the English
and
(b) not wanting to be ruled by them?
That's on a par with regarding the Unitarians as anti-Tory because they don't support the C of E or its rule by HMTQ.
We don't need the state getting involved there.
Personally I think there should never be a percentage of GNI commitment, and if there is it should include any private donations too. Currently we're paying "charities" taxes to then advertise on TV begging for donations. 🤔
Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxury!
We couldn't afford DREAMS!!!!
Repost this from previous thread. Vaccines are a huge success but they don't provide total protection, and more importantly, we are making the decision, consciously or by default, to remove controls while the coverage is only partial.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1414956533025280020?s=20
All of this means you should plan to spend at least an extra $700 for an unvaccinated family of four -- even before you get on the ship and consider onboard temptations...
https://www.cruisecritic.co.uk/articles.cfm?ID=6268
Only 35% of Leave voters back taking the knee compared to a much higher 73% of Remain voters
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1414951623437193224?s=20
Not sufficient to impose restrictions by law, no matter how "trivial". You have slightly lost perspective in this, Richard.
Via @TelegraphSport
Be interesting to see if they take any notice of wear masking.