politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Expectations of an easing are running high and Boris looks set
Comments
-
Seems plausible to me given there was nothing structural that caused this and the support given unlike in the States.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.eek said:
That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".rottenborough said:After weeks of sitting in sunny gardens, eating homemade cheese scones, Britain wakes up to the credit card bill
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/1258284755327606785
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
I'd like to see if someone could respond to my numbers I posted earlier that suggested the costs to the Exchequer could be a fraction of what we've been assuming - net.0 -
That's your choice as it clearly is for many others if PB is typical but please don't moan when we end up in lockdown again in a couple of months time. There is no easy way out of this so if people aren't willing to try to take steps to curtail it we know what the alternative is.Mysticrose said:
Yep and I won't touch it with a bargepole.IanB2 said:
No, the data of who you have contacted is only stored on the device until you report positive. At that point it is shared and those people are pinged.Sandpit said:
No, that's how the Apple/Google solution works. The NHS one works with a big database of names and locations behind it.IanB2 said:
The data is only stored on your own device until the point at which you choose to contact the NHS using it.LostPassword said:
I've seen a lot of that view on facebook. Makes me very sad.Mysticrose said:Not the faintest chance I will use this App and I know others who feel the same.
I'd consider the Apple / Google one if it's proven it doesn't store data.
We need this app. We need it to work. We need as many people to use it as possible, despite their distrust and disgust of the Tories.
Otherwise people die.
Records of contacts will be stored on phones. If a user comes down with coronavirus symptoms they report this in the app. That data is then shared with a health service database and their anonymous ID matched with other phones they have come into contact with.
We were shopping yesterday in a supermarket and there was a guy of about 40 shopping with 2 kids, 1 on a scooter and the kids were running round bumping into people and he wasn't taking a blind bit of notice of social distancing. As we left he was outside on the pavement talking to another couple about a foot apart complaining loudly about the pubs not being open completely missing the point that it is due to people like him that they won't be reopening any time soon.0 -
Hardly cyclical. Conjunctural perhaps.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.eek said:
That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".rottenborough said:After weeks of sitting in sunny gardens, eating homemade cheese scones, Britain wakes up to the credit card bill
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/1258284755327606785
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
0 -
The point was that the government pushed "45 minutes". Digging into the technicalities of that would have revealed it to be bullshit.DavidL said:
My vague recollection is that it was something to do with the flight time of a missile from Iraq to our sovereign bases on Cyprus. It really is astonishing that Alastair Campbell did not go to jail for the dodgy dossier. Even more astonishing than the idea that anyone should listen to a word he has said since.Malmesbury said:
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...kinabalu said:
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.Malmesbury said:
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"
The missile flight time to Cyprus was a justification after the fact, IIRC0 -
I see no reason why he can't open a wider variety of retail shops, with appropriate social distancing measures. Likewise hair salons with masks and sanitisers. That would be a huge, huge thing for many. Even being able to get a haircut by a pro at home would be huge for many.RochdalePioneers said:
When he announces nothing of the sort I wonder what their front pages will be on Monday?Scott_xP said:0 -
I think this is just a feature of the way the testing labs are set up. I always was shocked at how long it took to get a simple blood test result processed - sample sent to lab, lab tests a few days later, sends results back to GP, GP forwards to specialist (by fax, naturally, and occasionally after demanding payment). Took over a week in some case - I think it's a bit better now.eristdoof said:
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.JohnLilburne said:I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.
In other countries, they'll just take the sample and process it while you wait - on one occasion whilst abroad I think I just phoned the doctor's secretary and read the numbers out to her. I never understood why it wasn't possible for clinics to do this here.0 -
Mr. Rabbit, cheers.
Not a fan of doing financial things online unless necessary... hope it all works ok.0 -
I bet most of those highlighting the BoE report are "accidentally" omitting the projections of the rebound afterwards?rottenborough said:After weeks of sitting in sunny gardens, eating homemade cheese scones, Britain wakes up to the credit card bill
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/1258284755327606785
Because that either:
1 - Doesn't fit with causing drama and shock
2 - Doesn't march with the message they want to project.
Of course, a growth of 15% from a drop of 14% doesn't quite get you back to where you started - but it does only leave you 1% down.
A narrative of "The BoE has projected a huge fall this year matched with an equally huge rebound next year" wouldn't cause much drama, would it?
1 -
No chance they will say it was a mistake.LostPassword said:Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.
What they could say is that we flattened the curve and can ease off now. But I wouldn't expect even that much personally.0 -
If the virus goes away through vaccine, herd immunity, mutation out or sufficient suppression then the economy comes roaring back.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Bank of England actually pretty upbeat, saying we will make up the lost ground in 2 years. This implies they consider the effect almost entirely cyclical, which, if true, would be fantastic news.eek said:
That's not the credit card bill, that's your newly reduced wage from which you still need to pay the same outgoings as you had prior to the "holiday".rottenborough said:After weeks of sitting in sunny gardens, eating homemade cheese scones, Britain wakes up to the credit card bill
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/1258284755327606785
The credit card bill is the nasty surprise that lands on your doormat a month after you return from said holiday, just after you've discovered pay day has been and gone and you have £100 left to pay for 3 weeks of food and petrol.
If it hangs around like a bad smell, less so.1 -
My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.1
-
Rather than the arbitrary 100k a day target, Hancock would have been far better promising lesser numbers, but with time targets e.g. all NHS staff & hospital admissions within 24hrs, plebs 48hrs. With this disease speed of diagnosis is key, especially if you are in a position to spread it to a lot of people or needes on the frontline.eristdoof said:
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.JohnLilburne said:I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.0 -
Learn PyTorch ;-)MaxPB said:My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
0 -
I think citizens of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Hamburg in 1945 would strongly disagree with your claim about WW2 there. And I'm sure there are at least a hundred good other examples.Alphabet_Soup said:When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.0 -
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.Philip_Thompson said:
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.Cyclefree said:
There is concern here in Cumbria that the peak has not yet been reached.Pulpstar said:
What on earth does that mean. The entire country is under the same conditions, there is no "behind or ahead" internally with this virus.Big_G_NorthWales said:The north are two weeks behind London
In the advice. Not in the rules.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.0 -
Carnyx said:
Not sure if chimps do it in the wild (htrey famously do it in the zoo). But see thisBluestBlue said:
I wonder where in nature one finds beings whose natural inclination is to throw shit? I can't imagine.Dura_Ace said:
Why? Do you think the tories would be uncritically supportive of Corbyn if he were fucking this up. (Which he almost certainly would.)Stocky said:
Please lay off party politics.
Johnson wanted to be PM. Well this is what being PM is. Being abused and having shit flung at you 24/7 so fuck him right in his fat twat.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2003/03/frass-flies
Haha, that's brilliant. Wasps are shits.Carnyx said:
Not sure if chimps do it in the wild (htrey famously do it in the zoo). But see thisBluestBlue said:
I wonder where in nature one finds beings whose natural inclination is to throw shit? I can't imagine.Dura_Ace said:
Why? Do you think the tories would be uncritically supportive of Corbyn if he were fucking this up. (Which he almost certainly would.)Stocky said:
Please lay off party politics.
Johnson wanted to be PM. Well this is what being PM is. Being abused and having shit flung at you 24/7 so fuck him right in his fat twat.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2003/03/frass-flies0 -
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.Endillion said:
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.kinabalu said:
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".Endillion said:
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.0 -
I thought it was the time taken to prepare to fire said missile at Cyprus?DavidL said:
My vague recollection is that it was something to do with the flight time of a missile from Iraq to our sovereign bases on Cyprus. It really is astonishing that Alastair Campbell did not go to jail for the dodgy dossier. Even more astonishing than the idea that anyone should listen to a word he has said since.Malmesbury said:
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...kinabalu said:
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.Malmesbury said:
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"0 -
My comment was about Britain in relation to the current situation.eristdoof said:
I think citizens of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and Hamburg in 1945 would strongly disagree with your claim about WW2 there. And I'm sure there are at least a hundred good other examples.Alphabet_Soup said:When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.0 -
Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.1 -
Call me cynical, but if they discovered that lockdown had been a mistake, I highly doubt the findings would be revealed.LostPassword said:Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.0 -
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.FrancisUrquhart said:
Learn PyTorch ;-)MaxPB said:My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
0 -
The Ferguson news was much bigger than the fake news of nonsense comparisons the scientists say to take precautions with.kinabalu said:
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.Endillion said:
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.kinabalu said:
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".Endillion said:
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
The "threshold" effect was the following day when UK numbers passed 30k.0 -
I would be surprised if they haven't got something, and my thinking is along these lines.LostPassword said:Thinking of possible bunny rabbits that Johnson may have to pull out of his hat, I note that HMG are continuing to report test numbers from Pillar 4 - the high-quality population survey serology testing at Porton Down - but without saying anything about the results in terms of the overall prevalence of infection.
Perhaps he will get to announce that they've discovered infection has been much more widespread than thought, the fatality rate is consequently much lower and lockdown was, with the benefit of hindsight, a mistake.
Probably shouldn't get my hopes up, but I can only suppress my optimism for so long.0 -
Bit like a war bond?MaxPB said:Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.0 -
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously.OldKingCole said:
Thanks for asking.1 -
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterdayCyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.0 -
In all seriousness, it sounds in a way like lockdown has actually been a good thing for you, to be able to step away, recharge and try some new things.MaxPB said:
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.FrancisUrquhart said:
Learn PyTorch ;-)MaxPB said:My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
0 -
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.Cyclefree said:
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.Philip_Thompson said:
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.Cyclefree said:
There is concern here in Cumbria that the peak has not yet been reached.Pulpstar said:
What on earth does that mean. The entire country is under the same conditions, there is no "behind or ahead" internally with this virus.Big_G_NorthWales said:The north are two weeks behind London
In the advice. Not in the rules.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.0 -
Quite. The Iraq War offers a good example of how neither the press nor the Opposition should disarm for the sake of national unity.Malmesbury said:
On the topic of digging into stories, technicalities etc. WMDs and Iraq - what if someone had asked the question, that seemed obvious to me at the time, about the 45 minute thing...kinabalu said:
I'm reading the Campbell diaries atm. Seems so long ago now.Malmesbury said:
Well, part of the problem with story-by-chewing-up-press-releases is that you are still writing a story based on the press release. However much you chew. Hence the New Labour realisation of press control - simply embed some nice chewy stories in the press releases and the press will play good dog.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
"What is it that they can deploy, in 45 minutes?"0 -
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.HYUFD said:
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterdayCyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.1 -
Very competent ( far from perfect ), miles ahead of other parties.eek said:
Competent or just not as incompetent as the other parties who by any measure seem completely incompetent?Burgessian said:
Scotland's in a curious place. SNP seem to be completely dominant, like ANC in S Africa. Nicola miles ahead personally.malcolmg said:
Big issues on that will come to a head soon, next election at latest is SNP's last chance, if they do not make it about independence and tell Boris where to stuff his NO then there will be carnage.algarkirk said:
Scotland voting SNP but also being in the UK has it all ways, so it will take an earthquake to undo. Besides, lots of people who would vote for Starmer won't vote for the party as long as it is full of dim extremists.Mexicanpete said:
Scotland is a big problem for Labour. However, four years of Starmer appearing as Rumpole of the Bailey and Boris appearing like Bertie Wooster could change that.HYUFD said:
Starmer is no Blair, when Blair took over in 1994 he had a double digit lead, Starmer is over 10 points behind. Even John Smith was ahead when he took over in 1992.Nigel_Foremain said:
I know this might be an unfashionable view, but I think you might be in for another one at the next election. Starmer has 4 years to show his professionalism and Johnson has 4 years to show his rank amateurism, which the public will become increasingly tired of. I don't particularly want a Labour government, but the Tory party needs a very large dose of disinfectant, as does the Republican Party in the US.ThomasNashe said:
30 May for the diary. My memory of 1997 was finally knowing what multiple orgasm felt like.rottenborough said:A veritable feast:
General election on BBC:
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1258290364831629312
At best he will scrape in with the LDs, he will not get a majority for Labour
And yet, Indy, their core policy, is becoming ever less plausible as time goes on and Brexit becomes entrenched. Covid-19 is a further hammer blow.
I think the view of many Scots is pragmatic. Happy to vote SNP as they seem competent and can extract best deal from Westminster. But sniffy about independence because of devastating economic cost.0 -
Well, it's not. In my experience, anyone who interprets Italian data without a large mound of salt deserves everything that's coming to them. The figure they are reporting is simply wrong.kinabalu said:
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.Endillion said:
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.kinabalu said:
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".Endillion said:
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
Ours is also wrong, but less wrong. And to return to the original point, the papers getting things right for the wrong reason doesn't mean we don't have a properly functioning free press. But thank you for clarifying.1 -
Sorry, I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis. From what I understood from speaking to people who lived through the war, it was mainly rationing and bombing that had to be endured on the Home Front, and even the latter depended where you lived.Alphabet_Soup said:When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
As for the 1960s, I think you might have missed a generation in between.0 -
There is only one way to go , independence. Make 2011 just an independence vote, no ifs or buts.Carnyx said:
We had some interesting - and informative - chats on federalism here in 2013-4 in the runup to indyref 1. IIRC we generally agreed that short of bringing back the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy or some similar way of breaking up England, or giving the Scots (etc) an effective veto on what the English wanted, it was impossible to federalise the UK in any meaningful way. I've lost track of the number of SLAB pols and their UK equivalents who talk about Federalism as the solution but I've not seen one clear statement of how you would get those changes through. I'd say it is even less likely after Brexit.Burgessian said:
Starmer trying to square the circle with talk of "federalism", whatever that means.HYUFD said:
If people want independence they will vote SNP or a new Nat party, if Scottish Labour backed independence it would just lose its Unionist votemalcolmg said:
Up to your usual Scottish lack of knowledge. Miliband had nothing to do with other than being the dupe to follow tweedledee and tweedledum. Their supporting the Tories against the interests of Scotland was what did for them. They have no chance of any return until they realise that they are supposed to be a Scottish party and support independence, plus change almost every donkey they currently have as MSP's.HYUFD said:
Why? Gordon Brown's Labour easily won most seats in Scotland in 2010 and Darling led the winning No campaign in 2014.Alistair said:
No politician did more to lose Labour its Scottish seats.rottenborough said:Darling on R4. A reminder of a time when Labour had proper front rank politicians.
It was only under Ed Miliband Labour lost its Scottish MPs
He's not cut through yet but it will be interesting to see if he has any impact on SLABs fortunes. Miliband and Corbyn were almost purpose-built to repel Scottish voters, but a serious politician like Sir Keir may appeal to that grain of old-style moral purpose that you find with some strains of progressive opinion, if Indy ever goes off the boil. However, wouldn't hang my hat on it, certainly so long as SLAB are lumbered with Richard Leonard.0 -
Yes, and by the time 25 years comes around the economy is big enough to support rolling the debt into standard issue gilts.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Bit like a war bond?MaxPB said:Also, on economics I like the idea of the government selling long dated COVID bonds as tax free income for retail investors. It would be a good and cheap way to kick this 25 years into the future and enable people with cash to get a reasonable amount of tax free return.
We could probably raise £40-50bn fairly easily from retail investors that way if not more.0 -
All the best to both of you. You have both had a tough timemalcolmg said:
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously.OldKingCole said:
Thanks for asking.0 -
It's improving. Last time I had to have a blood test, the practice nurse took the bloods and I went back a week later and reception printed off the results. It was only precautionary and not particularly urgent so I'm not sure what turnround time they could have managed if necessary.Endillion said:
I think this is just a feature of the way the testing labs are set up. I always was shocked at how long it took to get a simple blood test result processed - sample sent to lab, lab tests a few days later, sends results back to GP, GP forwards to specialist (by fax, naturally, and occasionally after demanding payment). Took over a week in some case - I think it's a bit better now.eristdoof said:
Anecdote comparison with the situation in Germany (Berlin). A friend had flu symptoms on Sunday and Monday. There was good reason for her to get tested before this weekend, so she went to have a test on Monday. She got the result in under 24 hours. Thankfully negative. She does not have any fast-track status such as working in a hospital.JohnLilburne said:I've just followed up my covid test as it is now 6 days since I had it and the email said that in some circumstances it might take up to 5 days. It's easy to get through but some of the virtual call centre staff are very new and don't know what they're doing. The first was working her first shift and didn't know how to address the system to find out about tests that had previously taken place. The second said she needed my barcode number which is on a piece of paper you find in the test kit, so I scurried off to find it in the recycling. The third then used my personal data to raise a query without needing the barcode number! However she said it was taking up to 10 days in some cases as there is a backlog due to the number of tests sent out at the end of last week.
Not getting test result within 5 days is just crazy, the whole "test as much as possible" strategy is undervalued by slow processing of results.
In other countries, they'll just take the sample and process it while you wait - on one occasion whilst abroad I think I just phoned the doctor's secretary and read the numbers out to her. I never understood why it wasn't possible for clinics to do this here.0 -
I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?1
-
Advice and rules are quite distinct. I am advised not to smoke tobacco, I am arrested if I am caught buying heroin.Philip_Thompson said:
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.Cyclefree said:
There is concern here in Cumbria that the peak has not yet been reached.Pulpstar said:
What on earth does that mean. The entire country is under the same conditions, there is no "behind or ahead" internally with this virus.Big_G_NorthWales said:The north are two weeks behind London
In the advice. Not in the rules.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
0 -
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.HYUFD said:
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterdayCyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there0 -
Yes, it's been quite relaxing, it's also been nice to reconnect with my partner properly for the first time in a long time. We've both got such busy lives with work and social commitments, both of us are now on furlough so we're spending much more time together and it's been great.FrancisUrquhart said:
In all seriousness, it sounds in a way like lockdown has actually been a good thing for you, to be able to step away, recharge and try some new things.MaxPB said:
That sounds too much like work. This is the first proper non-working period I've had for about 5 years.FrancisUrquhart said:
Learn PyTorch ;-)MaxPB said:My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
0 -
Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.0 -
The government’s communications strategy - and the confusion between advice and rules - and with what individual Ministers have said off the cuff has been really poor. That really needs to change - especially when lockdown starts being eased.Philip_Thompson said:
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.Cyclefree said:
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.Philip_Thompson said:
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.Cyclefree said:
There is concern here in Cumbria that the peak has not yet been reached.Pulpstar said:
What on earth does that mean. The entire country is under the same conditions, there is no "behind or ahead" internally with this virus.Big_G_NorthWales said:The north are two weeks behind London
In the advice. Not in the rules.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.
0 -
Thanks G , have to say been a lot easier for me though.Big_G_NorthWales said:
All the best to both of you. You have both had a tough timemalcolmg said:
OKC, yes she appears to be getting better , she had a quick hospital visit for x-rays yesterday to see how her lungs are doing. Still to sort out the atrial flutter once things are a bit better, hopefully cardioversion will reset that. She is not happy taking all sorts of pills just now but for sure I see real signs of improving and less and less bad days so good all round at present. Think fact she was as fit as a fiddle before has helped , unlike me she exercised in her home gym religiously.OldKingCole said:
Thanks for asking.1 -
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.1 -
Given the virus has caused at least 30,000 deaths with these extreme measures, it's very likely the death toll would have been far worse without it.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
0 -
I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Sorry, I have no idea what is meant by the "suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat" the Nazis. From what I understood from speaking to people who lived through the war, it was mainly rationing and bombing that had to be endured on the Home Front, and even the latter depended where you lived.Alphabet_Soup said:When celebrating VE Day tomorrow we might remember the second-worst consequence of WW2, after the Nazis and their unspeakable horrors, was the suffocating atmosphere of social conformity the British had to endure in order to defeat them. This was not finally dispelled until the 1960s, and even then we had a continuing culture clash between the young, who craved every sort of freedom, and their parents, who had built their sense of identity around the uniformity of wartime.
Some comments here have, correctly, mentioned the impossibility of relying on the police to enforce lockdown. But a greater danger lies in the social breakdown between conformists and libertarians fighting a war of attrition over every aspect of "social distancing" that they have chosen to enforce or reject. Particularly as this will cut across other deep divisions of age, class, race etc.
As for the 1960s, I think you might have missed a generation in between.
I'll put you down as "conformist" then. The best ones don't even notice it.1 -
I am also surprised people just accept that the lockdown as the panacea to prevent Covid 19 spread, especially as our R figure was likely below 1 when we went into lockdown (based on the hospital admission peak on the 2nd April 2020). Maybe this much talked about enquiry will find that the lockdown only had a marginal impact on Covid-19 and that the other negative impacts of it were greater than its positives.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
0 -
As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
0 -
Very early days. Labour won't have to try very hard for people to eventually cotton on to the fact that we have a lazy buffoon as PM and the alternative is no longer an even worse option.BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.0 -
I really don't believe that graph as you can make it say whatever you want by picking different lag times. The government's advice was R was around 2 when the lockdown started.NerysHughes said:
I am also surprised people just accept that the lockdown as the panacea to prevent Covid 19 spread, especially as our R figure was likely below 1 when we went into lockdown (based on the hospital admission peak on the 2nd April 2020). Maybe this much talked about enquiry will find that the lockdown only had a marginal impact on Covid-19 and that the other negative impacts of it were greater than its positives.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
0 -
Depression rising anxiety falling according to the UCL Covid March study.
Anxiety below the level of pre lockdown
89 000 participants.0 -
Try and understand the difference between a rise in revenues and a rise in hiring. Or the difference between revenues and profits. An understanding of how Ocado actually operates - mainly using robots and minimising human involvement - would help too. Not to mention its statement that it is unable to fulfill many of the orders it receives. @RochdalePioneers has also explained how online ordering is not profitable for many supermarkets. Most shops and supermarkets will be retrenching not expanding.HYUFD said:
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.HYUFD said:
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterdayCyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
My children are starting to lose hope.
But, hey, we’ll have cakes delivered by Ocado to eat......
1 -
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.Philip_Thompson said:
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.kinabalu said:
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?Philip_Thompson said:
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)0 -
It is "back of a fag packet" government from a "back of a fag packet" PMCyclefree said:
The government’s communications strategy - and the confusion between advice and rules - and with what individual Ministers have said off the cuff has been really poor. That really needs to change - especially when lockdown starts being eased.Philip_Thompson said:
I doubt that is what the PM will do. But exercise once a day was the official advice and if that changes that is a meaningful change not irrelevant.Cyclefree said:
Er .... the difference between the law and advice is a very important distinction indeed. Not following the latter may be silly. Breaking the former can be a criminal offence.Philip_Thompson said:
Advice and rules is a distinction without a difference. Just like the government advising customers not to go to businesses. The government and media have said all along only exercise once a day outside - to the point that people are routinely joking about it - the fact that it was technically not illegal to exercise twice is moot.Cyclefree said:
There is concern here in Cumbria that the peak has not yet been reached.Pulpstar said:
What on earth does that mean. The entire country is under the same conditions, there is no "behind or ahead" internally with this virus.Big_G_NorthWales said:The north are two weeks behind London
In the advice. Not in the rules.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
People are quite rightly trying to follow the rules including the advice. If those change that's meaningful.
Stating that the rules have changed - when in fact they haven’t - if this is what the PM does - is the sort of deceitful spin which brings governments into disrepute and reduces trust, at a time when we need a trustworthy government.0 -
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?stodge said:As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.0 -
But not in the legislation. Look at it as a "Don't drink and drive" kind of thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
0 -
If the incidence of the virus is similar in the place from where the flight started, it makes no difference to the UK. Mixing two pots (albeit unequal in size) of the same temperature water makes no difference to the temperature of the combined pot.Philip_Thompson said:
We live in a globalised world. The damage that would cause would outweigh the benefits by an order of magnitude.Pulpstar said:
International flights from any region with cases when SARS 1 was going round ?DavidL said:
So you think we should have closed the economy down for SARS? Or H1N1 or bird flu? Novel virus is not the criteria, nor is there any absolutes.Pulpstar said:
Nonsense, it's a novel virus, to not go as precautionary as possible was always wildly irresponsible.DavidL said:
I think that there has been too much emphasis on we did what seemed right on the evidence we had at the time and not enough on well, if we knew what we know now... On that I agree.
Yes.
Plus what do we do with the potentially millions of Britons abroad?0 -
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.1 -
Pointing out the hypocrisy of those involved in leading our response is not sexist trivia. It wasn't with NZ's health minister, it wasn't with Scotland's CSO and it isn't with Ferguson. Pointing out hypocrisy is part of what a free press should be doing and airbrushing that out to hyperventilate over fake comparisons isn't progress.kinabalu said:
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.Philip_Thompson said:
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.kinabalu said:
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?Philip_Thompson said:
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)0 -
No transmission during a long distance flight occurs ?Barnesian said:
If the incidence of the virus is similar in the place from where the flight started, it makes no difference to the UK. Mixing two pots (albeit unequal in size) of the same temperature water makes no difference to the temperature of the combined pot.Philip_Thompson said:
We live in a globalised world. The damage that would cause would outweigh the benefits by an order of magnitude.Pulpstar said:
International flights from any region with cases when SARS 1 was going round ?DavidL said:
So you think we should have closed the economy down for SARS? Or H1N1 or bird flu? Novel virus is not the criteria, nor is there any absolutes.Pulpstar said:
Nonsense, it's a novel virus, to not go as precautionary as possible was always wildly irresponsible.DavidL said:
I think that there has been too much emphasis on we did what seemed right on the evidence we had at the time and not enough on well, if we knew what we know now... On that I agree.
Yes.
Plus what do we do with the potentially millions of Britons abroad?
A curious theory.0 -
Indeed. And if the PM said "it's ok to drink and drive" I think that would be news don't you?TOPPING said:
But not in the legislation. Look at it as a "Don't drink and drive" kind of thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
Most people right now are trying hard to follow the advice.0 -
Boris Johnson is blonder than Stevie Wondersquareroot2 said:
There are none so blond as those who cannot see.malcolmg said:
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.Stocky said:
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.Jonathan said:
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etcDavidL said:
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.AlastairMeeks said:
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.DavidL said:
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?noneoftheabove said:
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.Scott_xP said:
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.0 -
I thought Starmer was good yesterdaybigjohnowls said:
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
0 -
I've been on here complaining about lockdown and struggling with mental health. I think my epiphany has been that its the suspension of what I've spent 18 years doing that has caused the problems, not the lockdown as such. Its not WFH that has driven me mad, just work from a desk.
Fundamentally there is no magic wand that Johnson and PB chanters can wave. Many of us will be WFH at least in part from now on, and that means significant changes to our society from the makeup of our towns and cities to what kind of businesses prosper to our work life balance.
The really funny bit? On one hand digital connectivity is now *the* requirement we all need. To work, to shop, to socialise. On the other hand physical social connectivity which had been struggling in the era of everyone having a screen to distract them and now has stopped completely is what most of us crave. We have the opportunity to both significantly improve our digital connectivity to give us better work life balance AND use that balance to actually cherish the time we spend together and stop staring at screens...0 -
Maybe they will decide they are all the same and may as well vote for the one that doesn't bore them rigid.Nigel_Foremain said:
Very early days. Labour won't have to try very hard for people to eventually cotton on to the fact that we have a lazy buffoon as PM and the alternative is no longer an even worse option.BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
At this rate 2017 was a high point for Labour and they are actually finished.0 -
Another waste of time. Well I suspect it serves to keep some people off furlough.bigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.0 -
I couldn't agree more with this post.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.0 -
Not true. Some of the government’s severest critics on here have praised its financial response.isam said:
Boris Johnson is blonder than Stevie Wondersquareroot2 said:
There are none so blond as those who cannot see.malcolmg said:
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.Stocky said:
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.Jonathan said:
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etcDavidL said:
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.AlastairMeeks said:
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.DavidL said:
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?noneoftheabove said:
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.Scott_xP said:
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.0 -
Are you in town? How about birds and birdsong; cloud types; tree types; counting paving stones; 8hr plank; learning theMaxPB said:My furlough has been extended by another two weeks. I just wish I could do something with the time other than sit at home. So far I've started learning Italian, become a pretty decent baker, learned how to make pasta without a pasta machine and started researching how to brew my own beer. I'm running out of things to do.
harppenny whistlelead guitarpianorecorder online; War & Peace; A la recherche du temps perdu; Catcher in the Rye; the entire Alex Rider back catalogue; the entire Asterix back catalogue; etc0 -
Exercising once a day is still in the guidelinesRochdalePioneers said:
As I said, only in their heads. The *actual* rules are the legal regulations: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/madePhilip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
one form of exercise a day, for example a run, walk, or cycle -- alone or with members of your household
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others1 -
Indeed but unless you can start running some significant surpluses (as happened in the mid to late 90s under Clarke and then Brown) all you can do is service the debt interest which means the money for some things has to be taken and used to service the debt interest repayment and of course if you have to borrow you are running to stand still.Philip_Thompson said:
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
Yes Governments have to borrow in times of emergencies but income tax was introduced in 1799 to cover the cost of defeating Bonaparte. The argument for me is the response going forward can't just be to keep borrowing but to accept the finances need to be improved and to seek additional tax revenue (and it's the income side of the sheet that is suffering with reduced tax receipts currently).
If you have to borrow AND you aren't getting in any income both the deficit and the debt will be increasing.
0 -
https://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2020/05/nhs-app-could-use-apple-api/
Shocking. It's almost as if people who have worked in tech and developed apps said exactly this would happen. Can we bill Matt Hancock for the additional billions it will cost to extend the lockdown?
Literally everything that has gone through the DoH has been a disaster. Testing was a disaster, PPE procurement was a disaster, this app is an unfolding disaster. Boris needs to man up and sack Hancock.0 -
True. People do seem to like free money followed by recessionsCyclefree said:
Not true. Some of the government’s severest critics on here have praised its financial response.isam said:
Boris Johnson is blonder than Stevie Wondersquareroot2 said:
There are none so blond as those who cannot see.malcolmg said:
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.Stocky said:
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.Jonathan said:
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etcDavidL said:
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.AlastairMeeks said:
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.DavidL said:
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?noneoftheabove said:
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.Scott_xP said:
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.0 -
It is called holding those to account that should have greater resources than us to make decisions of great import. We know that all of you that bought the "get Brexit Done" bullshit will no doubt supinely wag your tails and take what ever crappy dog food "Boris" serves up to you.isam said:
Boris Johnson is blonder than Stevie Wondersquareroot2 said:
There are none so blond as those who cannot see.malcolmg said:
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.Stocky said:
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.Jonathan said:
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etcDavidL said:
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.AlastairMeeks said:
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.DavidL said:
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?noneoftheabove said:
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.Scott_xP said:
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
The rest of us are questioning why we have a cabinet so full of lightweights and more importantly why we have the highest death rate in Europe. The latter is very very important.0 -
That three parties that have had next to no coverage in the media in the last few months have increased their combined share by 6 pp just goes to show how some people behave away from an election.Pulpstar said:
I thought Starmer was good yesterdaybigjohnowls said:
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.0 -
One man's emergency is another's BAU. Yes CV-19 is by all objective assessment an emergency. But so could be argued homelessness, child poverty, Len McCluskey's retirement fund, etc.Philip_Thompson said:
We have never repaid our debts going back to the Napoleonic War if not before. Why would we start now?stodge said:As someone has already pointed out if you fall by 14% and then rise by 15% you aren't 1% ahead of where you were but 1% behind but I doubt any media will choose to explain the truth because the fiction from the figures is the message rather than the truth from the figures.
Sky were blatant the other day in taking the number of tests and "assuming" it was the number of people tested and with the economics the "distortion" of figures is part of a political message.
I also see some arguing that since the Government is borrowing money almost interest free we don't need to worry about repaying it. I'm not wholly convinced it's that simple - I'm also not convinced kicking that can down the road in its entirety is a good idea either.
Living on a deficit isn't viable but running debts during emergencies is. It just makes being sensible the rest of the time more (not less) important - so we have room to act during the emergencies.
It's the old would you sleep with me for a million dollars or a dollar. Once you have accepted the principle, you are a whore whatever the amount.0 -
Problem being all those who thought he was good will never vote for him anyway?Pulpstar said:
I thought Starmer was good yesterdaybigjohnowls said:
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
Good if you are struggling to sleep I would agree.
0 -
Now is not the time for Boris to sack his human shield Health Secretary. Not before the official inquiry.MaxPB said:https://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2020/05/nhs-app-could-use-apple-api/
Shocking. It's almost as if people who have worked in tech and developed apps said exactly this would happen. Can we bill Matt Hancock for the additional billions it will cost to extend the lockdown?
Literally everything that has gone through the DoH has been a disaster. Testing was a disaster, PPE procurement was a disaster, this app is an unfolding disaster. Boris needs to man up and sack Hancock.0 -
If loads of people have got the rona can the elderly really self-isolate? I mean, apparently the British can't even keep it out of care homes. Is there an example anywhere in world of elderly people self-isolating successfully?kyf_100 said:
I couldn't agree more with this post.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.0 -
Have we discussed this?
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1258316121264001025
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.0 -
I've not ruled it out, will have a think about who I vote for at the next GE.bigjohnowls said:
Problem being all those who thought he was good will never vote for him anyway?Pulpstar said:
I thought Starmer was good yesterdaybigjohnowls said:
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
Good if you are struggling to sleep I would agree.0 -
Fair point Mr FoREMAIN, maybe I place too much emphasis on BrexitNigel_Foremain said:
It is called holding those to account that should have greater resources than us to make decisions of great import. We know that all of you that bought the "get Brexit Done" bullshit will no doubt supinely wag your tails and take what ever crappy dog food "Boris" serves up to you.isam said:
Boris Johnson is blonder than Stevie Wondersquareroot2 said:
There are none so blond as those who cannot see.malcolmg said:
Maybe if they stopped lying all the time, admitted some mistakes and said they were doing their best then people may not be so cynical. Hard to believe anything they say due to the obvious lying and cheating on numbers etc. You just cannot trust a liar.Stocky said:
The facts that the UK, esp England, is one of the highest density countries in Europe (only Netherlands and Belgium are higher) and our status as a major economic hub and our wealth allowing international travel and our cherishing of the liberal democracy ideals have to be primary factors as to why our death rate is high.Jonathan said:
I have lost patience with the way this government spins and manipulates data to serve its short term political ends and am depressed that people go along with it.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jonathan, do you actually disagree with me about the statistics?
Do you disagree with my criticisms over the app/care home situation? Or that the Chinese cover up made things significantly worse in countries such as the UK and France?
Or is it only the single pro-Government line in my post that you consider to perhaps be worthy of doubt?
It is perfectly valid to discuss why our death count is so high, even if the government would prefer us not to.
If I had been writing a book on which European countries would be most affected by a global pandemic I would have had UK as favourite.
I`m long pissed off that this dreadful situation, which the government is battling like crazy to get us out of, is being used by many to bash the government for party political reasons. I find it shocking and immoral.
Please lay off party politics. I don`t vote Conservative, but support them in what they are trying to do, as I would any party at this time. We are all in this together.
The fact is that, had the UK got away relatively scot free with the Covid crisis, the people slagging the government now would not have given them any praise at all. They would have found a way to show that the countries who had it worse than us were destined to suffer more due to an ageing population, pollution etc etcDavidL said:
All countries should be trying to learn from other countries successes and failures. We learned the consequences of a collapsing health service from Italy and reacted accordingly. We didn't learn from the devastation of care homes in both Spain and Italy. I think its also legitimate for countries to take some pride in their own achievements, whether that is the ventilator machines built by F1 here or the remarkable successes of SK and Germany. But the idea of British exceptionalism and that others look to us especially for guidance is ridiculous, whoever it comes from.AlastairMeeks said:
This is one of these one-way valves, where it’s fine for the Prime Minister preposterously to claim that “there will be many people looking now at our apparent success”.DavidL said:
The Times really hasn't moved on from the Fog in Channel days, has it?noneoftheabove said:
No the world is looking at their own countries and thinking what to do next. The UK has a very weird narcissistic view of itself, the rest of the world dont spend 70% of time on their own country, 20% thinking about us and 10% thinking about the rest of the world.Scott_xP said:
If people are looking at other countries they are probably looking at US, China, South Korea and Germany for very different reasons.
It’s amazing how the people who start from a fixed point of view, then use a crowbar to make every bit of news fit it, probably genuinely don’t realise they’re doing it.
The rest of us are questioning why we have a cabinet so full of lightweights and more importantly why we have the highest death rate in Europe. The latter is very very important.0 -
Sure, if you like, That sounds less like a front page headline thing, and more like an op-ed style piece, though.kinabalu said:
It's a landmark that ought to trigger debate and introspection. The debate to include points of context and mitigation such as "apples and pears" and the introspection to focus on the lives lost, mistakes made, the way forward. That's what I would expect. Not a foaming laceration of the government. Not an airbrushing of the big picture in favour of sexist trivia.Philip_Thompson said:
Thanks. Let me know when you are back.kinabalu said:
Can I link to a memo from the government asking for the papers to lead with a massive photo of Ferguson's girlfriend rather than our Covid-19 death toll becoming the highest in Europe?Philip_Thompson said:
Is there any evidence to the claim the government wanted them to write that?kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
And anyway his whole thesis is nonsense since he's spinning the claim that the UK's death toll is higher than Italy's when we know that is factually incorrect given Italy's death toll isn't trying to include the care home deaths of which we know there have been a lot.
So he's complaining the press aren't lying. What a shame.
Let me have a root around. I'll be back.
Again feat toll being highest in Europe is nonsense unless you look per capita (Belgium are worse) or like for like with accurate stats (Italy and Spain are worse)0 -
So sorry for you and your family Cyclefree.Cyclefree said:
Try and understand the difference between a rise in revenues and a rise in hiring. Or the difference between revenues and profits. An understanding of how Ocado actually operates - mainly using robots and minimising human involvement - would help too. Not to mention its statement that it is unable to fulfill many of the orders it receives. @RochdalePioneers has also explained how online ordering is not profitable for many supermarkets. Most shops and supermarkets will be retrenching not expanding.HYUFD said:
She said the only employer left would be the NHS, I was just pointing out that some businesses e.g. online delivery companies like Occado have boosted their profits and seen an increase in demand for their services.Philip_Thompson said:
I'm sure that will be tremendously comforting to the Cyclefree family. You really have a tin ear.HYUFD said:
Occado announced a 40% rise in revenues in April yesterdayCyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.
I have no doubt they are a minority and most people are facing difficulties like the Cyclefrees but they are there
My children are starting to lose hope.
But, hey, we’ll have cakes delivered by Ocado to eat......
It is the most testing and trying of days for so many0 -
Eastern Europe has a very low death rateRichard_Nabavi said:Have we discussed this?
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1258316121264001025
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.0 -
Lifting the lockdown early is a massive gamble for Boris.
It risks compounding his original mistake (in eyes of the public) and making the case for a replacement (he is still messing up, we need someone else)0 -
Tough times. Those outside the public sector and large safe companies are very exposed.Cyclefree said:
Yes. Unashamedly so. Watching her trying to build up and maintain the business and her concern for her employees and the effect this is having on her and others in her situation in this area has given me an insight I did not have before. At least not at such a visceral level. I am, frankly, desperately worried. If it is not viable - and I don’t see how it will be for a while yet - its closure will have a terrible effect on lots of people, directly and indirectly, and there are not many alternatives available.kinabalu said:
We will see.Cyclefree said:
Thank you both.kinabalu said:
I agree. Just read it. Very good. As was Alastair's WW2 one.Richard_Tyndall said:Morning folks
its been a busy few days with work so not had much chance to even look at PB let alone post. But just wanted to say what a fantastic thread header Cyclefree wrote for the previous thread. Extremely well presented and informative.
PB at its best.
I hope the government reads, understands and follows!
Did I detect just a touch of special pleading for your daughter in there?
And do not forget my sons either. Or me, come to that. My work is not really feasible if people cannot meet. The entire Cyclefree family could very soon be permanently unemployed unless we can get jobs with the NHS which will likely soon be the only employer left in the country.1 -
The PM is effectively saying "it's ok to drink and drive" because the law doesn't say it's illegal to do so.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed. And if the PM said "it's ok to drink and drive" I think that would be news don't you?TOPPING said:
But not in the legislation. Look at it as a "Don't drink and drive" kind of thing.Philip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
Most people right now are trying hard to follow the advice.0 -
The Starmer version of Momentum’s take...bigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
https://twitter.com/spajw/status/1258334682439090176?s=210 -
Missing Comrade Corby eh? Far better to have a loser who is a real lefty eh? Starmer will put Labour back in a position of credibility that Corbyn whose pea brained intellect never stood a chance. Plenty of people will vote for Starmer, even if some believe (wrongly in my view) that he is dull. Either way I would rather have a dull professional in charge of an organisation than a gameshow host clown or a terrorist sympathising thickhead. Starmer will need to bide his time, but probably not for long. Labour will also need to show it has rooted out the extremists anti-Semites and weirdos that Corbyn attracted to them, and that it is a credible alternative government.bigjohnowls said:
Problem being all those who thought he was good will never vote for him anyway?Pulpstar said:
I thought Starmer was good yesterdaybigjohnowls said:
"Vote to watch paint dry"BannedinnParis said:
yeah. Labour are going to have to TRY HARDERbigjohnowls said:Forensic not so much
Westminster Voting Intention:
CON: 50% (-3)
LAB: 30% (-2)
LDM: 7% (+2)
GRN: 5% (+2)
BXP: 3% (+2)
Via
@YouGov
.
Changes w/ 16-17 Apr.
Good if you are struggling to sleep I would agree.0 -
Yes, and Germany and Austria of course. Maybe there is some genetic or cultural factor here, overlaying the differences in government and healthcare-system response.isam said:
Eastern Europe has a very low death rateRichard_Nabavi said:Have we discussed this?
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1258316121264001025
It does seem likely that there is some substantial genetic effect here, or at least some quite big effect which is not simply social deprivation and pre-existing conditions. If that is correct, then it is further reason to be cautious about international comparisons.0 -
Can you not see the problem? The *advice* being one thing and the *law* being another thing is a Bad Thing when you want people to do something.Philip_Thompson said:Most people right now are trying hard to follow the advice.
0 -
Twenty or so years ago when I was concerned with such matters it wasn't infrequent that, late on a Friday afternoon, those of us involved with Care of the Elderly wards would be instructed to find Care Home beds for however many elderly patients 'because A&E was filling up'.edmundintokyo said:
If loads of people have got the rona can the elderly really self-isolate? I mean, apparently the British can't even keep it out of care homes. Is there an example anywhere in world of elderly people self-isolating successfully?kyf_100 said:
I couldn't agree more with this post.houndtang said:I think the lockdown is stupid and pointless and is probably killing or harming more people than the virus. I am amazed at the almost total lack of questioning of the policy and how readily people submit themselves to these rules. Now the bloke who recommended it is caught breaking his own policy. We have empty hospitals, idle doctors, vulnerable people isolated, mental health problems soaring, urgent treatments cancelled, people too scared to go to the doctor, businesses folding, unemployment surging. And yet virtually no one outside the twittersphere (maybe Peter Hitchens) has seriously asked WTF?
A short, temporary lockdown to raise NHS capacity was understandable. But we are now destroying our economy for no good reason.
There have only been 332 deaths of under 45s in the entire country. This is a disease that kills the old, who don't work, who can self isolate. For most other people it is survivable.
We have destroyed our economy. And for what?
Even a couple of generations ago, it was well undertsood that life - that living - entails risks. The lockdown will go down in history as the apex of our zero risk, nanny state culture.
Why the apex? Because at some point people are going to realise we have to get back to work - and accept a certain amount of risk of death in our lives. We can reduce that risk - but can't avoid it entirely without decimating our quality of life.
Life is about more than survivial. It is the pint with the mate. The hug with the grandkids. The game of five a side. The gym. Whatever you enjoy. But most of all, life is about risk.0 -
But not the law (SI). In England, that is.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Exercising once a day is still in the guidelinesRochdalePioneers said:
As I said, only in their heads. The *actual* rules are the legal regulations: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/madePhilip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
one form of exercise a day, for example a run, walk, or cycle -- alone or with members of your household
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others0 -
The guidelines Are Not LegalDecrepiterJohnL said:
Exercising once a day is still in the guidelinesRochdalePioneers said:
As I said, only in their heads. The *actual* rules are the legal regulations: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/350/madePhilip_Thompson said:
Exercising once a day was literally in the rules Boris announced right at the start. https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-announces-coronavirus-lockdown-in-uk/RochdalePioneers said:
In a way they have. "Exercise once a day only" only existed in Michael Gove's head. "You can now go out more than once a day!" will be a marvellous loosening considering that you could always do so.Andy_Cooke said:I wonder how many readers of the Sun will have the impression that the rules have been relaxed already.
No restriction on frequency of exercise, length of exercise, location of exercise. Just because as I put it "a gobshite cabinet minister" said it doesn't make it the rules. The rule of law is the rules. With the emphasis on law.
one form of exercise a day, for example a run, walk, or cycle -- alone or with members of your household
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others/full-guidance-on-staying-at-home-and-away-from-others0 -
The press just disappoint me at times. And this was one of them.Endillion said:
Well, it's not. In my experience, anyone who interprets Italian data without a large mound of salt deserves everything that's coming to them. The figure they are reporting is simply wrong.kinabalu said:
It is the Mail, Telegraph, Sun, Express cohort I refer to, not you. And on the general point. Landmarks. The day unemployment hits, say, 2m is not of massively more significance than the day before when it was 1.96m or the day after when it will be 2.05m. Nevertheless these iconic moments of measurement tend to trigger discussion and introspection. Us passing Italy on Covid-19 deaths is surely such a moment. But no, we have a "married hotty" to get stuck into. The "we" being the 'gang of four' Tory press pack not you or I, for the avoidance of doubt.Endillion said:
Fairly sure I never said that about the testing? I'm happy to agree that the focus on the testing numbers was ludicrous. Hancock and his team deserve some credit for hitting a target that looked almost impossible a few weeks before, but that's about it.kinabalu said:
So "100k" (aka 83k) tests on a particular day merits an orgy of positive coverage but going top of the league table on deaths on a particular day merits but a shrug? This sounds to me like highly selective "obsessing over round numbers".Endillion said:
Oh yeah, that's a decent point, but I didn't get that far, and it's got nothing to do with the main issue. But on the first bit, I think he's entirely wrong: it's much more sensible for the papers to focus on the judgment of one of the Government's lead advisors than to obsess over round numbers and inappropriate international comparisons. Albeit that they may be doing it for the wrong reasons.kinabalu said:
I think his point is more that they seem to write what the government wants them to write. The best bit of the article for me was - regarding the Ferguson thing - his saying how tacky and inappropriate it was to splash the WOMAN'S face all over the front pages. I'm glad I'm not alone in finding that completely outrageous.Endillion said:
First time for everything...kinabalu said:
Wait, no, I tried reading it and gave up after he complained that we don't have a functioning free press, on the basis that they won't all write what he wants them to write.
Ours is also wrong, but less wrong. And to return to the original point, the papers getting things right for the wrong reason doesn't mean we don't have a properly functioning free press. But thank you for clarifying.0
