I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions. And wealth. On which point -
Housing. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate wealth. The cheap ones up North don't.
If you want to try and be rich and high status then move South, if you are happy with an average lifestyle and want to be able to be sure you can buy your own home on even an average income then move North
Perhaps the succession will go Eton-Charterhouse rather than Eton-Winchester to Rishi as so many expect.
Yes, if Johnson falls because of "Freedom Day" incompetence then Hunt is well positioned. Not least because Johnson will take down most of his cabinet with him.
A plausible take but about the most depressing thing I’ve heard in ages. Hunt with his “schools open in September… hard choices” has already ruined my weekend. They need to decide now. Do they care if kids catch covid? If so then vaccinate over the summer. If not, then stop testing testing them all together.
There are some diseases that children absolutely need vaccinating against.
Covid, surely, is not one of them.
We vaccinate children against rubella, not to protect them but rather to protect vulnerable adults, mumps too to an extent, pregnant women and fertile men respectively. So there is precedent.
And the children also benefit when they are older, presumably?
Well, the hope is that the children live to grow up to be adult* - so yes....
*I always liked PJ O'Rourke's comment on the early mines acts - "This created a great deal of unemployment among 12 year old boys. But it gave them the freedom to pursue other goals. Such as living to be 13."
Also losing the very high risk of scrotal cancer in adulthood, which makes a nice comparison with covid.
It's been quite the week in the culture wars. One Tory insider told @Alain_Tolhurst No.10 was "obsessed" with red wall voters, but feared they had created a caricature and completely misjudged the national mood.
Yes, it seems that the stereotyping of the Red Wall as neanderthal bigots is at least as much a problem for the Tories as for elements of Labour.
Not sure if it is 'at least as much' a problem for them, but it's certainly true the extent of the Red Wall has morphed in peoples' minds a bit, and it's homogenity of thought exaggerated. I think that cowardly (for not giving a name) insider is probably correct, as 'how will it play in the Red Wall?' seems to be the first and only question a lot of the time.
As rottenborough notes it opens up opportunities particularly for the LDs, as we have seen. Sure, the Tory bedrock is probably solid enough for another election, but they are overdoing the love bombing of the Red Wall compared to elsewhere.
The interesting thing is how little has actually been done for the Red Wall so far.
Town funds and a bit of putative infrastructure.
Anything else in serious amounts?
Warm words/hot air. There's been a hurricane force of that.
Since a great deal of the 'levelling up' will be infrastructure, it will take time. If they're serious about it, then it's a project for two decades or more.
But some is being done: on the railways alone, you have the Ashington line which may open in 2024, and although it is not the north, the Okehampton line in rural Devon has been totally relaid and should open by the end of the year. It should be said that the latter is the easiest of easy reopenings: private services were running until recently.
Mmm. Yes. The Ashington Line has been banged on about since the 90's. Planning has been since the early 10's. Under Labour, then Tory minority Council control. It's isn't really a Boris levelling up policy. They've just given it some funding. We are hamstrung here by being unable to reach any other part of the NE by rail without going through Newcastle.
Well, yes. It has been talked about for years - and so have Okehampton and others. But it's happening under them, whereas it wasn't before. The reason? The funding.
As an aside, the odd thing is that the railways seem to do quite well for investment under Conservative governments when compared to Labour. Thatcher's governments electrified many routes, whilst Brown and Blair's governments only electrified a few miles between Crewe and Kidsgrove. Under the coalition and Conservative governments, we've had GWML, EGIP, part of the MML, and work just started on the Trans-Pennine route. I've probably missed some.
If you're interested in the good of the railways, vote Conservative.
And yet you get the definite sense he is being truthful and he will spend the next year farming, as before
This is probably the greatest achievement of the show, and also why it works: Clarkson appears sincere most of the time, indeed passionately so
The worst bits of Top Gear and TGT were the most confected, insincere scenes (and the tedious interviews with celebrities, which he obviously disliked doing). Give him something he likes doing and really tries to do well, and he is naturally funny and watchable - and informative
Like others here, I learned more about modern farming in 8 hours than I have done in the last 30 years, while being richly entertained
Absolutely.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
It's been quite the week in the culture wars. One Tory insider told @Alain_Tolhurst No.10 was "obsessed" with red wall voters, but feared they had created a caricature and completely misjudged the national mood.
Yes, it seems that the stereotyping of the Red Wall as neanderthal bigots is at least as much a problem for the Tories as for elements of Labour.
Not sure if it is 'at least as much' a problem for them, but it's certainly true the extent of the Red Wall has morphed in peoples' minds a bit, and it's homogenity of thought exaggerated. I think that cowardly (for not giving a name) insider is probably correct, as 'how will it play in the Red Wall?' seems to be the first and only question a lot of the time.
As rottenborough notes it opens up opportunities particularly for the LDs, as we have seen. Sure, the Tory bedrock is probably solid enough for another election, but they are overdoing the love bombing of the Red Wall compared to elsewhere.
The interesting thing is how little has actually been done for the Red Wall so far.
Town funds and a bit of putative infrastructure.
Anything else in serious amounts?
Warm words/hot air. There's been a hurricane force of that.
Since a great deal of the 'levelling up' will be infrastructure, it will take time. If they're serious about it, then it's a project for two decades or more.
But some is being done: on the railways alone, you have the Ashington line which may open in 2024, and although it is not the north, the Okehampton line in rural Devon has been totally relaid and should open by the end of the year. It should be said that the latter is the easiest of easy reopenings: private services were running until recently.
Mmm. Yes. The Ashington Line has been banged on about since the 90's. Planning has been since the early 10's. Under Labour, then Tory minority Council control. It's isn't really a Boris levelling up policy. They've just given it some funding. We are hamstrung here by being unable to reach any other part of the NE by rail without going through Newcastle.
Well, yes. It has been talked about for years - and so have Okehampton and others. But it's happening under them, whereas it wasn't before. The reason? The funding.
As an aside, the odd thing is that the railways seem to do quite well for investment under Conservative governments when compared to Labour. Thatcher's governments electrified many routes, whilst Brown and Blair's governments only electrified a few miles between Crewe and Kidsgrove. Under the coalition and Conservative governments, we've had GWML, EGIP, part of the MML, and work just started on the Trans-Pennine route. I've probably missed some.
If you're interested in the good of the railways, vote Conservative.
Depends where you are. Devolved in Scotland, so add the SNP to that list (at least when the Tories aren't joining Labout and voting Edinburgh trams through and wrecking the public transport investment programmes). It's quite noriceable how Modern Railways writers regard the SNP as a positive influence.
I was going to ask about Wales but as one of us reminded us the other day, the railways in Wales are not devolved ...
And yet you get the definite sense he is being truthful and he will spend the next year farming, as before
This is probably the greatest achievement of the show, and also why it works: Clarkson appears sincere most of the time, indeed passionately so
The worst bits of Top Gear and TGT were the most confected, insincere scenes (and the tedious interviews with celebrities, which he obviously disliked doing). Give him something he likes doing and really tries to do well, and he is naturally funny and watchable - and informative
Like others here, I learned more about modern farming in 8 hours than I have done in the last 30 years, while being richly entertained
Absolutely.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
And yet you get the definite sense he is being truthful and he will spend the next year farming, as before
This is probably the greatest achievement of the show, and also why it works: Clarkson appears sincere most of the time, indeed passionately so
The worst bits of Top Gear and TGT were the most confected, insincere scenes (and the tedious interviews with celebrities, which he obviously disliked doing). Give him something he likes doing and really tries to do well, and he is naturally funny and watchable - and informative
Like others here, I learned more about modern farming in 8 hours than I have done in the last 30 years, while being richly entertained
Absolutely.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
You know he’s a remainer, right?
Indeed. Brave guy. I see (from press reports) he's been discovering the joys of Brexit, RP style.
Sajid Javid is understood to have held a face-to-face meeting with the Prime Minister yesterday, raising the possibility that Boris Johnson will be self-isolating on "Freedom Day" on Monday https://twitter.com/theipaper/status/1416382560486273026
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions. And wealth. On which point -
Housing. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate wealth. The cheap ones up North don't.
If you want to try and be rich and high status then move South, if you are happy with an average lifestyle and want to be able to be sure you can buy your own home on even an average income then move North
Is how it is now, yes, and has been for ages. Fob off Northerners with "Your houses are cheap and so your disposable income is high. Just enjoy that and leave the big boy stuff to the big boys."
"Leveling Up" hasn't happened until this changes. Until power and wealth and opportunity is devolved from London to a significant degree. That's my take on it. It's not about new shopping centres.
Sajid Javid is understood to have held a face-to-face meeting with the Prime Minister yesterday, raising the possibility that Boris Johnson will be self-isolating on "Freedom Day" on Monday https://twitter.com/theipaper/status/1416382560486273026
I thought government minsters didn't have to isolate as they were part of some trial scheme where they get tested every day? Hence Gove also escaped ping-mania the other week.
Mister Robert Smithson predicted that yesterday was The Peak in daily UK cases. I was fiercely skeptical, but if he has called it right - BRAVO
Zoe’s been good overall since June but past performance and all that…
Surely the only way that the Freedom Day on Monday is not going to bump that figure up is if there's a lot more immunity amongst the unvaxxed than we thought?
It's been quite the week in the culture wars. One Tory insider told @Alain_Tolhurst No.10 was "obsessed" with red wall voters, but feared they had created a caricature and completely misjudged the national mood.
Yes, it seems that the stereotyping of the Red Wall as neanderthal bigots is at least as much a problem for the Tories as for elements of Labour.
Not sure if it is 'at least as much' a problem for them, but it's certainly true the extent of the Red Wall has morphed in peoples' minds a bit, and it's homogenity of thought exaggerated. I think that cowardly (for not giving a name) insider is probably correct, as 'how will it play in the Red Wall?' seems to be the first and only question a lot of the time.
As rottenborough notes it opens up opportunities particularly for the LDs, as we have seen. Sure, the Tory bedrock is probably solid enough for another election, but they are overdoing the love bombing of the Red Wall compared to elsewhere.
The interesting thing is how little has actually been done for the Red Wall so far.
Town funds and a bit of putative infrastructure.
Anything else in serious amounts?
Warm words/hot air. There's been a hurricane force of that.
Since a great deal of the 'levelling up' will be infrastructure, it will take time. If they're serious about it, then it's a project for two decades or more.
But some is being done: on the railways alone, you have the Ashington line which may open in 2024, and although it is not the north, the Okehampton line in rural Devon has been totally relaid and should open by the end of the year. It should be said that the latter is the easiest of easy reopenings: private services were running until recently.
Mmm. Yes. The Ashington Line has been banged on about since the 90's. Planning has been since the early 10's. Under Labour, then Tory minority Council control. It's isn't really a Boris levelling up policy. They've just given it some funding. We are hamstrung here by being unable to reach any other part of the NE by rail without going through Newcastle.
Well, yes. It has been talked about for years - and so have Okehampton and others. But it's happening under them, whereas it wasn't before. The reason? The funding.
As an aside, the odd thing is that the railways seem to do quite well for investment under Conservative governments when compared to Labour. Thatcher's governments electrified many routes, whilst Brown and Blair's governments only electrified a few miles between Crewe and Kidsgrove. Under the coalition and Conservative governments, we've had GWML, EGIP, part of the MML, and work just started on the Trans-Pennine route. I've probably missed some.
If you're interested in the good of the railways, vote Conservative.
Depends where you are. Devolved in Scotland, so add the SNP to that list (at least when the Tories aren't joining Labout and voting Edinburgh trams through and wrecking the public transport investment programmes). It's quite noriceable how Modern Railways writers regard the SNP as a positive influence.
I was going to ask about Wales but as one of us reminded us the other day, the railways in Wales are not devolved ...
Yep, Scotland's done well with this - not just line reopenings, but stations as well. Wales has as well - e.g. the Ebbw Vale line (albeit this was led by the area's Labour then-MP).
As for the Edinburgh trams - I personally thing it was a good idea, and although I haven't looked deeply into it, it seems to have been really incompetently carried out. In particular, as they trimmed the route down to the airport spine, the less compelling the entire project became. I'm hoping things will improve with the extension to Leith and Newhaven - IMO that should have been the first bit to open...
It remains to be seen whether the floods will impact on these numbers but it's the first poll for a long time showing the Union at 30% while Green support has sunk back to 20% and the SPD are creeping back up as well.
Three polls from Italy but the key point is the Brothers of Italy (FdL), LEGA and the Social Democrats are in a statistical tie at 20%. FdL have moved up slowly but steadily as the main opposition to the broad based Government. Five Star are on 15% and Forza Italia on 9%. Next election is due no later than 1/6/23.
In Bulgaria, Trifonov and the ITN have eschewed coalition building and are going to try to form a minority Government when the Parliament assembles this week. I suspect it won't end well and, dare I say it, another election could b eon the cards in the autumn.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
GB News staff predicting Nigel Farage will take over the daily afternoon show on the channel from Simon McCoy. All speculative, but could result in Farage co-presenting with Alex Phillips - an ex-UKIP leader hosting a news show with balance provided by his former spokesperson. https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1416379924286525440
They do realise they will have even fewer advertisers with this move don't they?
Mister Robert Smithson predicted that yesterday was The Peak in daily UK cases. I was fiercely skeptical, but if he has called it right - BRAVO
Zoe’s been good overall since June but past performance and all that…
Surely the only way that the Freedom Day on Monday is not going to bump that figure up is if there's a lot more immunity amongst the unvaxxed than we thought?
I don’t think it’s going to make a heck of a lot of difference. The effect of the end of the marginal number of remaining restrictions will be offset by the upcoming good weather, schools breaking up in England, and the end of the Euros
It's been quite the week in the culture wars. One Tory insider told @Alain_Tolhurst No.10 was "obsessed" with red wall voters, but feared they had created a caricature and completely misjudged the national mood.
Yes, it seems that the stereotyping of the Red Wall as neanderthal bigots is at least as much a problem for the Tories as for elements of Labour.
Not sure if it is 'at least as much' a problem for them, but it's certainly true the extent of the Red Wall has morphed in peoples' minds a bit, and it's homogenity of thought exaggerated. I think that cowardly (for not giving a name) insider is probably correct, as 'how will it play in the Red Wall?' seems to be the first and only question a lot of the time.
As rottenborough notes it opens up opportunities particularly for the LDs, as we have seen. Sure, the Tory bedrock is probably solid enough for another election, but they are overdoing the love bombing of the Red Wall compared to elsewhere.
The interesting thing is how little has actually been done for the Red Wall so far.
Town funds and a bit of putative infrastructure.
Anything else in serious amounts?
Warm words/hot air. There's been a hurricane force of that.
Since a great deal of the 'levelling up' will be infrastructure, it will take time. If they're serious about it, then it's a project for two decades or more.
But some is being done: on the railways alone, you have the Ashington line which may open in 2024, and although it is not the north, the Okehampton line in rural Devon has been totally relaid and should open by the end of the year. It should be said that the latter is the easiest of easy reopenings: private services were running until recently.
Mmm. Yes. The Ashington Line has been banged on about since the 90's. Planning has been since the early 10's. Under Labour, then Tory minority Council control. It's isn't really a Boris levelling up policy. They've just given it some funding. We are hamstrung here by being unable to reach any other part of the NE by rail without going through Newcastle.
Well, yes. It has been talked about for years - and so have Okehampton and others. But it's happening under them, whereas it wasn't before. The reason? The funding.
As an aside, the odd thing is that the railways seem to do quite well for investment under Conservative governments when compared to Labour. Thatcher's governments electrified many routes, whilst Brown and Blair's governments only electrified a few miles between Crewe and Kidsgrove. Under the coalition and Conservative governments, we've had GWML, EGIP, part of the MML, and work just started on the Trans-Pennine route. I've probably missed some.
If you're interested in the good of the railways, vote Conservative.
Depends where you are. Devolved in Scotland, so add the SNP to that list (at least when the Tories aren't joining Labout and voting Edinburgh trams through and wrecking the public transport investment programmes). It's quite noriceable how Modern Railways writers regard the SNP as a positive influence.
I was going to ask about Wales but as one of us reminded us the other day, the railways in Wales are not devolved ...
Yep, Scotland's done well with this - not just line reopenings, but stations as well. Wales has as well - e.g. the Ebbw Vale line (albeit this was led by the area's Labour then-MP).
As for the Edinburgh trams - I personally thing it was a good idea, and although I haven't looked deeply into it, it seems to have been really incompetently carried out. In particular, as they trimmed the route down to the airport spine, the less compelling the entire project became. I'm hoping things will improve with the extension to Leith and Newhaven - IMO that should have been the first bit to open...
I agree - excellent idea in principle, atrocious execution. Still needs 3-5 more lines including light railey ones to the Midlothian towns. It could have been great for my working life and look what happens. Edit: not just Midlothian, but also inner West and East Lothian.
And one very underestimated improvement - Waverley Steps. An escalator at last!!!!!
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
I have never regretted moving from London to the East Midlands. Housing is so much better value here, and other aspects of lifestyle too. It is still a rat race here but the other rats are a lot slower.
If I fancy a trip into London, it takes about the same on the train as getting in from Tooting on the Northern line did. Indeed I am going down tommorow to see Foxjr2 in his new play. Getting good reviews.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
I have never regretted moving from London to the East Midlands. Housing is so much better value here, and other aspects of lifestyle too. It is still a rat race here but the other rats are a lot slower.
If I fancy a trip into London, it takes about the same on the train as getting in from Tooting on the Northern line did. Indeed I am going down tommorow to see Foxjr2 in his new play. Getting good reviews.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
Mister Robert Smithson predicted that yesterday was The Peak in daily UK cases. I was fiercely skeptical, but if he has called it right - BRAVO
Zoe’s been good overall since June but past performance and all that…
One thing I think a lot of people could have been underplaying is the impact of the football. It’s not the crowds at Wembley or anything. It’s the enormous numbers in pubs. Scotland’s cases rapidly increased when they were in the tournament and have dropped rapidly since. It could well be that England’s do the same.
I am a bit confused by some tw@tterati stance....Macron making vaccines effectively mandatory as there will checks on vaccination status to access restaurants etc, great move....UK wanted vaccine passport, racist, discriminatory, id cards by the backdoor etc etc etc....
Mister Robert Smithson predicted that yesterday was The Peak in daily UK cases. I was fiercely skeptical, but if he has called it right - BRAVO
Zoe’s been good overall since June but past performance and all that…
One thing I think a lot of people could have been underplaying is the impact of the football. It’s not the crowds at Wembley or anything. It’s the enormous numbers in pubs. Scotland’s cases rapidly increased when they were in the tournament and have dropped rapidly since. It could well be that England’s do the same.
Also loads of people will have had their mates around, all sitting in the same room for 3hrs, screaming, shouting, hugging, etc etc etc.
I have to say Clarkson's Farm is superb, by far the best thing he's done in many a year
Isn’t it? Not only very entertaining but subtly educational. I learned more about farming in Britain in those few episodes than many years of countryfile.
The same narrative arc and styling as a Top Gear special too, which is clearly a Clarkson hallmark: Clarkson has whacky idea; others warn him it’s mad; cue a series of slapstick disasters and set-piece fish out of water scenes; then a sudden change of mood as a big vista opens up, things start working like clockwork, and Clarkson’s voice takes on a tone of wonder.
And also quite how much financial capital and hence risk there is in setting up in farming; he had to spend a lot of £ on attachments for his tractor.
You can see why co-operatives work so well in France and Italy, collectively buying expensive kit and then renting it out to its members on a non-profit basis. Whereas UK and US farmers have to buy all their own stuff.
Do they? The farmers I know tend to work in a collective when it comes to machines. Farmer A does the hay cropping on a contract basis, Farmer B has the fencing kit and the hedging flail, Farmer C puts his cattle on Farmer A's field etc etc.
Maybe this doesn't happen in Big Farmer country (cereals etc), although I thought a lot of the harvesting was also done on a contract basis.
There are different types of farming cooperatives - at one end something like co-owning machinery or say a grain dryer.
At the other end marketing or processing organisations.
At the top end there are quite a few that turn over in the 100s of millions ukp.
Just discovered I can watch my youngest play an away 3rd XI division six South cricket game live on YouTube. Sadly after he was out. Utterly, utterly unimaginable even 10 years ago.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Having denied it and lied about it, they finally admit it in the 4th footnote of p.208 in a report slipped out on the day Boris Johnson made his big levelling up speech.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
I have never regretted moving from London to the East Midlands. Housing is so much better value here, and other aspects of lifestyle too. It is still a rat race here but the other rats are a lot slower.
If I fancy a trip into London, it takes about the same on the train as getting in from Tooting on the Northern line did. Indeed I am going down tommorow to see Foxjr2 in his new play. Getting good reviews.
Slower rats! Never thought of it like that, but yes, that's probably true to a certain extent.
Well, I would be shocked, I tell you, shocked if this happens.
Fox News UK by end of the year. Chasing ratings by ending up as snarling, outrage TV that way was only ever going to be the model that worked imho.
To be fair, didn't his show on LBC do surprisingly well? Then he overstepped the mark with BLM stuff and got the heave ho?
You don't have to agree with Farage to see that he is charismatic and intelligent. That said, when he's been on panels before, he can sometimes visibly lose interest when not speaking.
Through gritted teeth - but yes, true. I had some regard for him at one time despite being contra his politics. The scales fell from my eyes when he started Trumping. It's a scientific impossibility for an intelligent person to combine ardent support for the Big Orange with any sort of human decency.
His enemies should play the footage of him swooning like a besotted school girl when Trump flew into town at every opportunity - his mystique would be utterly shot in the UK if that took hold in the public consciousness.
Not necessarily, 13% of British voters wanted Trump to beat Biden and that 13% of Leave voting, Boris and Trump lovers is GB news' core target audience (and likely significantly overlaps with the 13% who voted for Farage's UKIP in 2015)
Am I the only one who finds the title of this thread unfortunate given the history of drugs cheats in athletics? This is compounded by the thought that any drugs cheat would quite rightly be disqualified from SPOTY.
Let's be clear: no one is doubting Dina Asher Smith's integrity, or that she's a clean athlete.
Maybe: "Questioning Dina Asher Smith's SPOTY chances" would have been a better headline? These things matter.
Mister Robert Smithson predicted that yesterday was The Peak in daily UK cases. I was fiercely skeptical, but if he has called it right - BRAVO
Zoe’s been good overall since June but past performance and all that…
One thing I think a lot of people could have been underplaying is the impact of the football. It’s not the crowds at Wembley or anything. It’s the enormous numbers in pubs. Scotland’s cases rapidly increased when they were in the tournament and have dropped rapidly since. It could well be that England’s do the same.
Yeah, I think the end of restrictions this week will be offset by the end of the football, more people outside as the weather improves and the English schools breaking up. Although I just said that didn’t I…sorry, tough day.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Well the Government's "plan" is that case numbers don't particularly matter, and that our vaccination rate is good enough. France is in a different situation by and large. But it's good for my Indian vaccine backed holiday, so i'm reasonably content...
Am I the only one who finds the title of this thread unfortunate given the history of drugs cheats in athletics? This is compounded by the thought that any drugs cheat would quite rightly be disqualified from SPOTY.
Let's be clear: no one is doubting Dina Asher Smith's integrity, or that she's a clean athlete.
Maybe: "Questioning Dina Asher Smith's SPOTY chances" would have been a better headline? These things matter.
This is a betting site, I think most people know what the title is getting at.
Brother has covid, mum says he's fatigued. One jab, mid thirties. Fortunately my parents have had no contact so will be seeing them for my Dad's birthday tommorow
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Well the Government's "plan" is that case numbers don't particularly matter, and that our vaccination rate is good enough. France is in a different situation by and large. But it's good for my Indian vaccine backed holiday, so i'm reasonably content...
It might be quite a good plan, despite your speech commas. They’ve vaccinated twice almost everyone most likely to die from covid. They’ve vaccinated the largest number we probably can of people most likely to be hospitalised from covid.
We know the vaccines prevent hospitalisation in almost all cases in those vaccinated. And we know hospitalisation is rare for the under 30s, much less the under 18s. So once this wave of hospitalisations peaks, we should be in a good position to stop worrying about cases, which will occur largely in children, the vaccinated or the previously exposed.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
I have never regretted moving from London to the East Midlands. Housing is so much better value here, and other aspects of lifestyle too. It is still a rat race here but the other rats are a lot slower.
If I fancy a trip into London, it takes about the same on the train as getting in from Tooting on the Northern line did. Indeed I am going down tommorow to see Foxjr2 in his new play. Getting good reviews.
Slower rats! Never thought of it like that, but yes, that's probably true to a certain extent.
A little known fact is that patches of the country have rats with different degrees of tolerance for different rat poisons.
In my part of the East Midlands we seem to have super-rats.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
What do you mean by 'high status jobs and professions' ?
Everywhere has doctors and lawyers and landowners and successful business owners.
So what's this 'power and influence' ? Is it something people in Hampstead pretend they have to make up for living in a flat or two bedroom terrace ?
As to ever higher house prices ? Is that really what you think people should be yearning after ? Are possible future inheritances something people should be basing their lives around ? It all sounds like some unpleasant combo of Jane Austen and Peter Mandelson.
And what are the people who don't have the wealth and aren't going to inherit anything to do in London ? It doesn't sound like a basis for a equitable and happy society to me.
And yet you get the definite sense he is being truthful and he will spend the next year farming, as before
This is probably the greatest achievement of the show, and also why it works: Clarkson appears sincere most of the time, indeed passionately so
The worst bits of Top Gear and TGT were the most confected, insincere scenes (and the tedious interviews with celebrities, which he obviously disliked doing). Give him something he likes doing and really tries to do well, and he is naturally funny and watchable - and informative
Like others here, I learned more about modern farming in 8 hours than I have done in the last 30 years, while being richly entertained
Absolutely.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
AIUI it hasn’t been renewed.
I hope it isn’t, actually. Not because I didn’t enjoy it - I did, very much, and I agree with Horse it’s the best thing Clarkson’s done in years.
I just don’t see how they could get that model of Clarkson cocking everything up through naivety, ignorance, inexperience and bad luck with the weather to work twice. So a second season would likely be a dud and detract from the enjoyment of Season 1.
A more interesting idea if they do go ahead would be to widen it so it’s not just about Clarkson but about Caleb Cooper. Despite having many of the less convincing scripted lines (anyone notice he was always talking about Clarkson’s ‘poxy sheep’ despite saying in the first episode he ran 50 sheep on a small holding and fattened four pigs a year?) was very much the star and whose contracting business would allow for a wider range of farms, types and issues than Clarkson alone.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
What's this Leveling Up all about then?
What is needed is more of those £50k jobs so that more people have the choice not to move to London to pursue a career.
The disparity is mainly in the provision of infrastructure, and that is really what needs levelling up. London seems to attract all the transport investment (and I'd include HS2 in that)
Brother has covid, mum says he's fatigued. One jab, mid thirties. Fortunately my parents have had no contact so will be seeing them for my Dad's birthday tommorow
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
You can't live off money in a house unless you sell it, though, so if you ever want to see that money, you'll have to move somewhere cheaper eventually.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
What's this Leveling Up all about then?
What is needed is more of those £50k jobs so that more people have the choice not to move to London to pursue a career.
The disparity is mainly in the provision of infrastructure, and that is really what needs levelling up. London seems to attract all the transport investment (and I'd include HS2 in that)
I’m old enough to remember when a bushy blonde haired mayor was campaigning against HS2, among other reasons because without also building Crossrail 2 through the London terminus, the extra passengers would overwhelm the London Underground.
Seems to have died a quiet death since he became PM that one hasn’t it.
Tunisia: latest daily figure for deaths is the highest ever, 205, but given that the 7-day cases figure peaked last Tuesday this is probably explicable by the lag.
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
What do you mean by 'high status jobs and professions' ?
Everywhere has doctors and lawyers and landowners and successful business owners.
So what's this 'power and influence' ? Is it something people in Hampstead pretend they have to make up for living in a flat or two bedroom terrace ?
As to ever higher house prices ? Is that really what you think people should be yearning after ? Are possible future inheritances something people should be basing their lives around ? It all sounds like some unpleasant combo of Jane Austen and Peter Mandelson.
And what are the people who don't have the wealth and aren't going to inherit anything to do in London ? It doesn't sound like a basis for a equitable and happy society to me.
So why the big deal about leveling up? If this view is aligned to most people's reality we needn't worry whether it's just a soundbite because there's no real problem to be tackled.
Brother has covid, mum says he's fatigued. One jab, mid thirties. Fortunately my parents have had no contact so will be seeing them for my Dad's birthday tommorow
The bright side is he doesn't have to worry about catching it afterwards for a long time.
Will he need to start his vaccination from does one again a month after recovery ?
Its coming home, its coming home, COVID coming home.
A dig into the cases by specimen date in England is actually more encouraging. First reports for yesterday (Friday) are down on Thursday’s by more than usual.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Vaccination is massively skewed to the most at risk groups though.
If you want to encourage further vaccination one idea would be put the pictures and names of everyone who died that day who wouldn't get vaccinated on the news. With a backing track of 'Another one bites the dust' followed by laughter.
Oliver Johnson @BristOliver Resolutely sticking to the view that I don't know when and how large the UK peak will be, and that the range of the uncertainty around any reasonable forecast probably includes both "it's basically fine" and "we have a very serious problem".
I don't think this is a complete cop out, because we genuinely don't know how Monday goes. Paradoxically, if enough people believe it'll all be fine it may well not be, but if enough people believe it won't it might be. Try modelling that.
Sajid Javid is understood to have held a face-to-face meeting with the Prime Minister yesterday, raising the possibility that Boris Johnson will be self-isolating on "Freedom Day" on Monday https://twitter.com/theipaper/status/1416382560486273026
I thought government minsters didn't have to isolate as they were part of some trial scheme where they get tested every day? Hence Gove also escaped ping-mania the other week.
Don't interrupt Scott - while he's salivating at the thought the HS might have spread Covid into a Care Home.
A question for the experts - just had my second AZT jab finally. I now understand it caould improve my chances of avoiding serious illness by over 90% of my previous chance. I read today that statins reduce the risk of serious Covid by around 40%. Can I add that in the same way to bring my risk down further as i've takne them for many years?
And yet you get the definite sense he is being truthful and he will spend the next year farming, as before
This is probably the greatest achievement of the show, and also why it works: Clarkson appears sincere most of the time, indeed passionately so
The worst bits of Top Gear and TGT were the most confected, insincere scenes (and the tedious interviews with celebrities, which he obviously disliked doing). Give him something he likes doing and really tries to do well, and he is naturally funny and watchable - and informative
Like others here, I learned more about modern farming in 8 hours than I have done in the last 30 years, while being richly entertained
Absolutely.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
AIUI it hasn’t been renewed.
I hope it isn’t, actually. Not because I didn’t enjoy it - I did, very much, and I agree with Horse it’s the best thing Clarkson’s done in years.
I just don’t see how they could get that model of Clarkson cocking everything up through naivety, ignorance, inexperience and bad luck with the weather to work twice. So a second season would likely be a dud and detract from the enjoyment of Season 1.
A more interesting idea if they do go ahead would be to widen it so it’s not just about Clarkson but about Caleb Cooper. Despite having many of the less convincing scripted lines (anyone notice he was always talking about Clarkson’s ‘poxy sheep’ despite saying in the first episode he ran 50 sheep on a small holding and fattened four pigs a year?) was very much the star and whose contracting business would allow for a wider range of farms, types and issues than Clarkson alone.
It will surely be renewed in some form. It’s a massive hit, and not just in the UK. And it is bringing millions of new customers to Amazon. Are they really going to resist all this profit?
‘Clarkson's Farm is officially Amazon’s highest-ever rated show.’
However you have a good point. They can’t just repeat the first season. Perhaps that is why they are hesitating before announcing, they need to work out the right format
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
Globally, you can get vaccinated, or you can get Delta. That’s your stark choice now.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Well the Government's "plan" is that case numbers don't particularly matter, and that our vaccination rate is good enough. France is in a different situation by and large. But it's good for my Indian vaccine backed holiday, so i'm reasonably content...
It might be quite a good plan, despite your speech commas. They’ve vaccinated twice almost everyone most likely to die from covid. They’ve vaccinated the largest number we probably can of people most likely to be hospitalised from covid.
We know the vaccines prevent hospitalisation in almost all cases in those vaccinated. And we know hospitalisation is rare for the under 30s, much less the under 18s. So once this wave of hospitalisations peaks, we should be in a good position to stop worrying about cases, which will occur largely in children, the vaccinated or the previously exposed.
What’s your “plan” wise arse?
I wasn’t saying it was a bad “plan”! The point was that the person I was replying to was framing a “plan” as doing something. As opposed to not doing something.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
Globally, you can get vaccinated, or you can get Delta. That’s your stark choice now.
The coronavirus reproduction number in Holland is R2.9 - in a widely vaxxed population
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
Globally, you can get vaccinated, or you can get Delta. That’s your stark choice now.
Delta is like a free vaccine but with far worse and far more frequent side effects than either Pfizer or Azn. And the bit that people like contrarian will really hate, you don’t get to choose whether you have it or not!
Rob Smithson was wrong, then. Yesterday wasn’t the Peak
It wasn’t the peak by reporting date certainly. Could have been the peak by specimen date (see my post above)
He wasn't specific, so perhaps he meant specimen date, but he should have said. Personally I think the dashbord figure, reporting date, is the easiest to use, the others are like deeper clues
We've got another week of largely open schools and Freedom Day on Monday, so I will stand by my prediction of a reporting day peak of ~87,000 on Weds July 28
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Rob Smithson was wrong, then. Yesterday wasn’t the Peak
It wasn’t the peak by reporting date certainly. Could have been the peak by specimen date (see my post above)
He wasn't specific, so perhaps he meant specimen date, but he should have said. Personally I think the dashbord figure, reporting date, is the easiest to use, the others are like deeper clues
We've got another week of largely open schools and Freedom Day on Monday, so I will stand by my prediction of a reporting day peak of ~87,000 on Weds July 28
I think we agreed reporting date, in which case you are right,
I’ve done a lot of reading on “Levelling Up” in the past week.
Boris seems - as far as I can tell - passionate about the topic, and his boffins have figured out the the right policy shape.
He has also appointed Neil O’Brien - MP for Harborough to champion - and Neil apparently has a good reputation. A proper white paper is due in the Autumn.
The problem is going to be delivery, since;
1. The cabinet are not all aligned. Particularly, he has strong Thatcherites in the key posts of Treasury and BEIS.
2. To this properly *does* involve considerable investment. Given govt finances, that does raise a question of where this is to come from. 2a. Traditional Tories suspect it must come “from the South”.
3. In essence, the need is to invest in Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow and Liverpool. There is no electoral benefit to the Tories in doing so.
4. The governance reforms necessary do not carry support in the Tory shires. 4a. Spending is one thing, but the Treasury would rather eat dirt than see money actually *devolved*.
my fear is that this aint gonna happen.
I'd have some confidence Leveling Up was more than a soundbite if the pretence that it won't disadvantage wealthy areas were dropped. You can't improve the relative prospects of the North cf the South without reducing the relative prospects of the South cf the North. This is not to say it's a zero sum game - it doesn't have to be in absolute terms - but "leveling" implies a focus on relativities and this IS a zero sum game.
So I'll be listening out for some squeals from Surrey and if I hear them - and they're loud enough - this will indicate to me that Johnson is indeed hell bent on improving the lot of working class people in the sorts of places I grew up in. In which case good on him and although I could never vote for a Tory I might start calling him Boris.
I know a working class lad from South Yorkshire, left school at 16 and got an apprenticeship, now 20 and a qualified welder. No student debt and buying a house.
I wonder how many middle class kids from Surrey could do likewise.
Perhaps C&A was your 'squeal from Surrey' - well Buckinghamshire though the Conservatives did much better in the local elections there than in Surrey.
Though whether they're squealing about unaffordable housing or too many houses being built I don't know.
So you don't think there's a need to prioritize the North? - Is the point you're making?
The North is a big place and different factors apply to different demographics and different parts.
But if you're an average person with an average family and an average job who wants an average house and an average life then I'd say most of the North will be more suitable for you than most of the South and in particular London (a place of extremes not averages).
Of course prioritization can mean different things - housing isn't, on general, a northern problem whereas more money spent on transport (which means roads in the north not trains) and redeveloping town centres would be better.
And I'm happy for you southerners to maintain your 'grim up north' views if it allows more money to be spent there.
So that's a yes to my question. Fair enough. I can understand a person who lives up there and likes it getting pissed off with negative stereotypes of what the North is all about. But speaking personally, I had to leave to snaffle a high status, white collar career. Welding is fine but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about earning big money (and preferably legally) without getting your hands dirty. Without doing anything more taxing than pressing a key on a phone. The opportunities in those areas were all down here. London and environs. I doubt this is changed. If it has, great, but I really doubt it. I'd have heard about it.
Certainly there's more chance of getting a £100k job in London than anywhere else.
But the chances of anyone close to the average getting one is effectively sod all - that sort of money is made by the highly skilled and highly driven or those with a highly privileged background.
Now if you want a £40k, £50k or £60k job in the North that's a different story. Maybe not much money to some in North London but then a house in Barnsley costs a lot less than one in Barnet.
2 things though:
Power & Influence. This comes from high status jobs and professions not from just doing ok.
Wealth. Those pricey properties in the South accumulate it. The cheap ones up North don't.
What do you mean by 'high status jobs and professions' ?
Everywhere has doctors and lawyers and landowners and successful business owners.
So what's this 'power and influence' ? Is it something people in Hampstead pretend they have to make up for living in a flat or two bedroom terrace ?
As to ever higher house prices ? Is that really what you think people should be yearning after ? Are possible future inheritances something people should be basing their lives around ? It all sounds like some unpleasant combo of Jane Austen and Peter Mandelson.
And what are the people who don't have the wealth and aren't going to inherit anything to do in London ? It doesn't sound like a basis for a equitable and happy society to me.
So why the big deal about leveling up? If this view is aligned to most people's reality we needn't worry whether it's just a soundbite because there's no real problem to be tackled.
Don't know but possible answers include:
1) Genuine problems do exist in some areas.
2) 'Grim up north' stereotyping.
3) Genuinely thinking that places need to be 'more like London' even when they certainly don't.
4) Its popular and wins votes.
5) An easy return in PR terms - go and do the 'grim up north' photoshoot and then two years later return to the same town and have the photoshoot among new houses and declare the strategy a triumph.
Interesting to note after the U.K. announcement yesterday, (which is de facto casting doubt on vaccines) that the French by contrast have gone all in on vaccines. Domestic passes, and no restrictions on entering or leaving the country for vaccinated people. They’ve also come off the fence and are accepting the Indian vaccine. It certainly seems to have had a rocket ship effect in countering vaccine hesitancy.
UK first doses are 46.2 million, the UK population is 67.1 million (ONS June 2021), so 20.9 million UK inhabitants are unvaccinated. COVID cases are rocketing, and the government's plan is??? At least the Macron government seems to be taking action.
Well the Government's "plan" is that case numbers don't particularly matter, and that our vaccination rate is good enough. France is in a different situation by and large. But it's good for my Indian vaccine backed holiday, so i'm reasonably content...
It might be quite a good plan, despite your speech commas. They’ve vaccinated twice almost everyone most likely to die from covid. They’ve vaccinated the largest number we probably can of people most likely to be hospitalised from covid.
We know the vaccines prevent hospitalisation in almost all cases in those vaccinated. And we know hospitalisation is rare for the under 30s, much less the under 18s. So once this wave of hospitalisations peaks, we should be in a good position to stop worrying about cases, which will occur largely in children, the vaccinated or the previously exposed.
What’s your “plan” wise arse?
I wasn’t saying it was a bad “plan”! The point was that the person I was replying to was framing a “plan” as doing something. As opposed to not doing something.
Fair dinkum! I am particularly nervous that Johnson is about to shit the bed and unwind the reopening after a week so am easily triggered.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
Ultimately the country will run out of anti-vaxxers to infect.
And meanwhile hundreds of thousands more vaccinations come into effect everyday.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
The vaxed, remember. Also the population is not homogeneous or totally mixed esp in school hols. Scottish school return (earlier than England) willl be interesting.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
FWIW I agree with you. If by the end of August/early September hospital admissions haven’t topped out I think some restrictions (not a lockdown) could be brought back, but I’d be surprised if we haven’t peaked before then. Scotland has, Zoe indicates we are plateauing, and the schools in England are breaking up. So, yeah, I’m concerned but not yet alarmed by the way things are going. But, again, I’m a lawyer. What do I know?
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
The vaxed, remember. Also the population is not homogeneous or totally mixed esp in school hols. Scottish school return (earlier than England) willl be interesting.
But it is basic maths. The UK has endured 5.5m Covid cases since the pandemic began, and we have double jabbed 35m. Clearly there is much overlap between these numbers, but there will also be cases which have gone unreported
Quite soon the virus will begin to exhaust its supply of hosts, and R0 will plunge
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
Nige will have a nightly show on GB News called "Farage" every Monday to Thursday from next week. And he "won't be taking the knee for anyone". What a guy!
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
And it was a very necessary policy when it was the only way of stopping a killer virus from rampaging through the population.
That isn’t the case any more. Vaccines have fundamentally altered the equation. Even those who are getting sick after being double jabbed are not dying in large numbers.
Which is why we should unlock now. When 89% of adults in my local area have had one jab and 70% have had two, if it isn’t over now it will never be over and we simply have to accept it will always be there.
Which is roughly why I’ve gone from being a strong proponent of lockdowns to being strongly opposed to them.
Nige will have a nightly show on GB News called "Farage" every Monday to Thursday from next week. And he "won't be taking the knee for anyone". What a guy!
Nige will have a nightly show on GB News called "Farage" every Monday to Thursday from next week. And he "won't be taking the knee for anyone". What a guy!
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
The vaxed, remember. Also the population is not homogeneous or totally mixed esp in school hols. Scottish school return (earlier than England) willl be interesting.
But it is basic maths. The UK has endured 5.5m Covid cases since the pandemic began, and we have double jabbed 35m. Clearly there is much overlap between these numbers, but there will also be cases which have gone unreported
Quite soon the virus will begin to exhaust its supply of hosts, and R0 will plunge
Quite. But the double vaccinated can catch and pass it on AIUI. So there is still a supply of hosts, albeit with transmission disrupted - hopefully to more than compensate for the higher basic infectiousness. It presumably all depends on the actual figures in reality.
Edit: and of course the actual impact on the person too.
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
The vaxed, remember. Also the population is not homogeneous or totally mixed esp in school hols. Scottish school return (earlier than England) willl be interesting.
But it is basic maths. The UK has endured 5.5m Covid cases since the pandemic began, and we have double jabbed 35m. Clearly there is much overlap between these numbers, but there will also be cases which have gone unreported
Quite soon the virus will begin to exhaust its supply of hosts, and R0 will plunge
seahorse @seahorse4000 · 17h I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
I don't know what it's like where the rest of you live, but in our district (population: about 135,000) confirmed cases are very heavily skewed towards the under 40s (the rate for the over 80s is currently zero,) and not a single Covid death has been recorded for the whole of the last three months. This is despite the fact that cases started trickling upwards again in late May and then took off like a rocket about a month ago, and our vaccination percentages are nothing special, being slightly below the national average. Meanwhile, as recently as Tuesday, the total number of Covid patients in the main hospital for this area, which serves a population considerably greater than that of the district, was eight. Not eighty. Eight.
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
Lockdown has become the default, goto policy. Hilariously, Johnson was once a well known liberal type.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
But corona is burning through the population, 55,000 reported cases a day, and this after 17 months of infection
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
The vaxed, remember. Also the population is not homogeneous or totally mixed esp in school hols. Scottish school return (earlier than England) willl be interesting.
But it is basic maths. The UK has endured 5.5m Covid cases since the pandemic began, and we have double jabbed 35m. Clearly there is much overlap between these numbers, but there will also be cases which have gone unreported
Quite soon the virus will begin to exhaust its supply of hosts, and R0 will plunge
Comments
As an aside, the odd thing is that the railways seem to do quite well for investment under Conservative governments when compared to Labour. Thatcher's governments electrified many routes, whilst Brown and Blair's governments only electrified a few miles between Crewe and Kidsgrove. Under the coalition and Conservative governments, we've had GWML, EGIP, part of the MML, and work just started on the Trans-Pennine route. I've probably missed some.
If you're interested in the good of the railways, vote Conservative.
And of course he has booked 2 more seasons so he has to do at least some farmering
I was going to ask about Wales but as one of us reminded us the other day, the railways in Wales are not devolved ...
Where's the free speech brigade?
"Leveling Up" hasn't happened until this changes. Until power and wealth and opportunity is devolved from London to a significant degree. That's my take on it. It's not about new shopping centres.
As for the Edinburgh trams - I personally thing it was a good idea, and although I haven't looked deeply into it, it seems to have been really incompetently carried out. In particular, as they trimmed the route down to the airport spine, the less compelling the entire project became. I'm hoping things will improve with the extension to Leith and Newhaven - IMO that should have been the first bit to open...
A quick look at some Euro-polling - first, the latest from Germany:
CDU/CSU-EPP: 30% (+1)
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 20% (-2)
SPD-S&D: 15% (+1)
AfD-ID: 10%
FDP-RE: 10%
LINKE-LEFT: 7%
(changes from last poll on 22/6-24/6)
It remains to be seen whether the floods will impact on these numbers but it's the first poll for a long time showing the Union at 30% while Green support has sunk back to 20% and the SPD are creeping back up as well.
Three polls from Italy but the key point is the Brothers of Italy (FdL), LEGA and the Social Democrats are in a statistical tie at 20%. FdL have moved up slowly but steadily as the main opposition to the broad based Government.
Five Star are on 15% and Forza Italia on 9%. Next election is due no later than 1/6/23.
In Bulgaria, Trifonov and the ITN have eschewed coalition building and are going to try to form a minority Government when the Parliament assembles this week. I suspect it won't end well and, dare I say it, another election could b eon the cards in the autumn.
If you've paid off the mortgage on your 3 quid house in the Noooorth then you could always invest in some property funds if you feel you are missing out.
Personally, I'd rather avoid all the hassle of London. Power and Influence are mostly illusory.
And one very underestimated improvement - Waverley Steps. An escalator at last!!!!!
If I fancy a trip into London, it takes about the same on the train as getting in from Tooting on the Northern line did. Indeed I am going down tommorow to see Foxjr2 in his new play. Getting good reviews.
At the other end marketing or processing organisations.
At the top end there are quite a few that turn over in the 100s of millions ukp.
Here is a slightly old list. Arla is only no 4.
https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/25-biggest-farming-co-ops-ranked-by-turnover
Government admits Boris Johnson's flat refurb originally paid for by Tory donors
The bizarre funding chain was finally confirmed in the fourth footnote on the 208th page of the Cabinet Office’s annual report, which the Government quietly published on Thursday
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/government-admits-boris-johnsons-flat-24555148
Let's be clear: no one is doubting Dina Asher Smith's integrity, or that she's a clean athlete.
Maybe: "Questioning Dina Asher Smith's SPOTY chances" would have been a better headline? These things matter.
One jab, mid thirties.
Fortunately my parents have had no contact so will be seeing them for my Dad's birthday tommorow
We know the vaccines prevent hospitalisation in almost all cases in those vaccinated. And we know hospitalisation is rare for the under 30s, much less the under 18s. So once this wave of hospitalisations peaks, we should be in a good position to stop worrying about cases, which will occur largely in children, the vaccinated or the previously exposed.
What’s your “plan” wise arse?
In my part of the East Midlands we seem to have super-rats.
Everywhere has doctors and lawyers and landowners and successful business owners.
So what's this 'power and influence' ? Is it something people in Hampstead pretend they have to make up for living in a flat or two bedroom terrace ?
As to ever higher house prices ? Is that really what you think people should be yearning after ? Are possible future inheritances something people should be basing their lives around ? It all sounds like some unpleasant combo of Jane Austen and Peter Mandelson.
And what are the people who don't have the wealth and aren't going to inherit anything to do in London ? It doesn't sound like a basis for a equitable and happy society to me.
I hope it isn’t, actually. Not because I didn’t enjoy it - I did, very much, and I agree with Horse it’s the best thing Clarkson’s done in years.
I just don’t see how they could get that model of Clarkson cocking everything up through naivety, ignorance, inexperience and bad luck with the weather to work twice. So a second season would likely be a dud and detract from the enjoyment of Season 1.
A more interesting idea if they do go ahead would be to widen it so it’s not just about Clarkson but about Caleb Cooper. Despite having many of the less convincing scripted lines (anyone notice he was always talking about Clarkson’s ‘poxy sheep’ despite saying in the first episode he ran 50 sheep on a small holding and fattened four pigs a year?) was very much the star and whose contracting business would allow for a wider range of farms, types and issues than Clarkson alone.
The disparity is mainly in the provision of infrastructure, and that is really what needs levelling up. London seems to attract all the transport investment (and I'd include HS2 in that)
Its coming home, its coming home, COVID coming home.
Seems to have died a quiet death since he became PM that one hasn’t it.
Will he need to start his vaccination from does one again a month after recovery ?
Politics For All
@PoliticsForAlI
· 2h
🚨 | NEW: Sajid Javid had a meeting with the PM yesterday, suggesting he is set to be pinged
If you want to encourage further vaccination one idea would be put the pictures and names of everyone who died that day who wouldn't get vaccinated on the news. With a backing track of 'Another one bites the dust' followed by laughter.
@BristOliver
Resolutely sticking to the view that I don't know when and how large the UK peak will be, and that the range of the uncertainty around any reasonable forecast probably includes both "it's basically fine" and "we have a very serious problem".
I don't think this is a complete cop out, because we genuinely don't know how Monday goes. Paradoxically, if enough people believe it'll all be fine it may well not be, but if enough people believe it won't it might be. Try modelling that.
‘Clarkson's Farm is officially Amazon’s highest-ever rated show.’
https://drivetribe.com/p/clarksons-farm-breaks-amazon-prime-DqUX4t-OSOGiuknuJCV3JA
However you have a good point. They can’t just repeat the first season. Perhaps that is why they are hesitating before announcing, they need to work out the right format
seahorse
@seahorse4000
·
17h
I can't count the number of times today I wrote "40 years old" (or 30, or 35) "fit and well, no medical history, not vaccinated"
https://twitter.com/michaelsavage/status/1416413456677359620
… by doing the reverse of his late night announcement and scrapping tests for people entering France if they are double vaxed
Via Politico Covid newsletter https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1416419838671663106/photo/1
The coronavirus reproduction number in Holland is R2.9 - in a widely vaxxed population
Delta is insanely contagious
https://coronadashboard.government.nl/landelijk/reproductiegetal
We've got another week of largely open schools and Freedom Day on Monday, so I will stand by my prediction of a reporting day peak of ~87,000 on Weds July 28
Of course, none of this is going to save us. If the national stats don't begin heading in the right direction very soon, we're going to end up back in lockdown along with everybody else. Great.
1) Genuine problems do exist in some areas.
2) 'Grim up north' stereotyping.
3) Genuinely thinking that places need to be 'more like London' even when they certainly don't.
4) Its popular and wins votes.
5) An easy return in PR terms - go and do the 'grim up north' photoshoot and then two years later return to the same town and have the photoshoot among new houses and declare the strategy a triumph.
It will be back in autumn sadly.
Rachel Clarke
@doctor_oxford
·
2h
If you feel unwell:
Please *don’t* do what Sajid Javid describes here.
LFTs are for those without symptoms, as the NHS website clearly states.
A negative LFT does *not* rule out Covid.
If you have Covid symptoms, book a PCR test & self-isolate until the result is back 🙏
And meanwhile hundreds of thousands more vaccinations come into effect everyday.
It will soon run out of potential unvaxed hosts, unless it mutates so that it can easily reinfect
The bug won't have anywhere to go, so an autumn lockdown seems unlikely. Or am I missing something?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/16/covid-19-seasonal-virus-spreading-during-summer-pandemic
Quite soon the virus will begin to exhaust its supply of hosts, and R0 will plunge
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1416427725770866690
That isn’t the case any more. Vaccines have fundamentally altered the equation. Even those who are getting sick after being double jabbed are not dying in large numbers.
Which is why we should unlock now. When 89% of adults in my local area have had one jab and 70% have had two, if it isn’t over now it will never be over and we simply have to accept it will always be there.
Which is roughly why I’ve gone from being a strong proponent of lockdowns to being strongly opposed to them.
Fecking Republican...
Edit: and of course the actual impact on the person too.
It very definitely isn't.