politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Does this Indy writer have a point – is Boris now really that

BannedinnParis said:

In other news, listened to an interesting documentary about other times the US was in a crisis or effectively locked down - mostly pandemic or environmentally related.


1775-82, smallpox epidemic
1816, the year without summer
1893, the panic of 1893
1918-19 spanish flu
1931-36 dustbowl (on top of depression)
1942-3ish, east coast dim outs

Year without summer?

That's a new one on me! Will need to read about that.

https://twitter.com/TFletcher/status/1262786955886186498?s=20

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

The same Sean O'Grady who wrote an Independent article saying why he was voting Brexit then another one on why he regretted voting Brexit?

Move on Mike.

Nigel_Foremain said:

Rexel56 said:

I don’t understand why posters get exasperated by @Philip_Thompson ... he has been consistent in the arguments he makes and they are underpinned by what he sees as the fundamental principle: that nothing should be imposed without the consent of the demos. So, an individual or business can, post Brexit, choose what standards they adopt for a product.. the fact that the chosen standard is one published by the EU is neither here nor there, the point is that the business is not compelled to do so by the EU, the business can choose not to sell in the EU... the same business must adopt a U.K. standard because that mandate is based directly or indirectly on an act of the U.K. parliament elected by the U.K. demos. Further, he holds that a demos is necessarily bound by the nation state and that EU representatives in a EU parliament can never, therefore, be democratic.

By all means, debate with @Philip_Thompson on the principle of democratic assent and whether it can transcend the nation state, anything else is just detail and won’t reach a consensus.

Nope, sorry to be harsh, but he is on here so much that he ends up arguing on things that he clearly has limited knowledge and probably zero personal experience. That is exasperating perhaps, but it does not mean it should not be challenged.

I maintain that what comes across as limited knowledge and/or experience is because he applies the principle I described consistently and regardless of what you would deem to be irrational conclusions that nobody in the real world of, say, multinational manufacturing would recognise. Certainly, the arguments he then makes make less and less sense the more of an expert you might be. You’re immersed in the detail, he is endeavouring to apply a principle to something of which he is unsure. By all means, laugh and point at any faux pas he makes in doing so. Doesn’t and won’t cause him to readdress his principles and values.

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

RobD said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Philip_Thompson said:

williamglenn said:

Philip_Thompson said:

anotherex_tory said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1262755905382215694

Every trade deal references the other side. What we aren't ok with is dynamic alignment so that if the EU changes their law their ours changes too.

Our law will change with theirs because otherwise our companies will not be able to sell their stuff. Most "EU law" is about regulations. If you want to export to EU you have to comply. If you want to sell to US you have to comply with theirs. It is very simple really, just not simple enough for Brexiteers to understand.

We will always remain under the rules of the EU if we want to sell things in the EU. As we are already under the rules of the US when Range Rovers have to have US spec lights and other mods to be sold into that market. Or Japan. Or anywhere.

To listen to the stupid wing of the Brexit wing you'd think that once we Take Back Control we won't have to follow anyone else's rules and will simply Do What We Want and they will take it because we're EnglandBritain and we rule the waves. Not that there are racist overtones, definitely not.

No the idea is that for people who want to do their own thing in their own country then our own laws will apply as we elect. Not Europe's.

No harm in exporters meeting EU standards exporters around the world find ways to do that without applying every single EU law domestically. To listen to some people it would be impossibly to export to the EU from China.

How does a factory simultaneously make parts to two different standards? Wouldn’t the largest market and highest standards win? Which market and which standards do you foresee in that guise?

Standards are pretty globalised and not the real issue. My laptop which I'm pretty sure was manufactured in Asia is stamped with both a CE mark and an FCC mark. Do we need to be in the USA or applying US laws just because a product meets FCC rules?

Then you're advocating a kind of geopolitical freeloading. We should just sit back and benefit from the stability provided by Pax Americana/Pax Europaea without pulling our weight. Given that the world is most likely facing a period of instability, it's not a very responsible position.

Are Asian countries freeloading when they meet CE standards for exports while having their own standards domestically?

It's an entirely reasonable position and we can vary our standards wherever it suits us.

Some people here are acting as if it's possible to only manufacture to one specification and that's it. It's not the case. In fact manufacturers are used to meeting many specifications of products. Go shopping for a TV and there are countless model numbers each different somehow yet they're all capable of being manufactured. Funny that!

It may suit us to be aligned in some areas and varied in others. If we vary manufacturers will be more than capable of making a GB Model to suit us if there's demand while still manufacturing EU models if there's demand. That's what manufacturers do, they meet customer demand.

Give it a rest mate, you are talking out of your arse

I'm actually curious, which parts of the post are incorrect?

The general naivety. Ask anyone who has had anything to do with manufacturing of any level of regulated goods and they will tell you that alignment to EU regulations will be just as high after Brexit as before it. To suggest we will make a "GB Model" is fundamentally silly, unless it were a Ma and Pa firm, but we are not talking about such organisations. If we have a separate, non-aligned regulatory system, many companies will not bother to manufacture for our market. We might have a small divergence over areas such as labelling, but that already existed anyway. I would guess that the government has absolutely no intention of doing anything less than having complete regulatory alignment with the EU on manufactured goods, unless they are even more stupid than I thought.

We already have GB models for cars. If it suits us and there's public demand for it we can get GB models for whatever we want, whether that be as simple as sticking a union flag on it, or more complicating like left Vs right hand drive.

What matters is what we choose. Freely as consumers and voters.

Oh dear. The cars are still completely in regulatory alignment, as are all the components.

But they're different models. You claimed "GB Model" was infeasible just one post ago.

You were wrong. There's no reason why GB models are infeasible.

We may wish to be aligned sometimes, even most of the time, but if we decide to vary standards we can. Our choice.

Fine, but dont pretend there is no economic cost to this "choice" which we will very rarely exercise. Different standards add costs to the consumer.

rottenborough said:

eristdoof said:

Endillion said:

eristdoof said:

kjh said:

rottenborough said:

Andrew said:

A curiousity going forward here is that excess mortality is about to dip back to normal levels - although we'll still have deaths registered as caused by covid, the net pandemic effect will be zero. It'll be interesting to see how the media and public understand and/or react to that (not insignificant) difference, and how it then leads govt policy.

People are dying with covid on their certificate who would have died anyway from complex array of problems?

Presumably there will be a significant number of people who would have died in the near future who have died of Covid in the last couple of months thus bringing the death rate below the 5 year average for a number of future months when we are past the Covid impact.

If someone is driving dangerously mounts the pavement and runs over one elderly person who "would have died in the near future" anyway, this is considered an outrageous tragedy.

When 10,000 such people suffer a nasty death due to a pandemic, many people say 'it's sad but they would have died soon anyway'.

I find this totally baffling.

Posting this again, because Neil Ferguson's idiotic assertion that "up to two thirds of coronavirus victims may have died this year anyway" seems to have stuck:

https://www.theactuary.com/features/2020/05/07/co-morbidity-question

Plenty of people live for decades with serious pre-existing medical conditions (diabetes, in particular). Even obese male 80-year-old smokers with heart conditions can be expected to live, on average, another five to ten years. It is complete nonsense to assume that the people who have died to Covid-19 in the past few months will have a material downward impact on mortality for the rest of the year, just by no longer being in the population.

That article is excellent. Please don't hold back from reposting the link anytime you see the arguement "they would have died soon anyway".

One small quote
... a life expectancy below a couple of years can be found only by assuming acute cancers, or other serious but less critical conditions at ages above 90, or such conditions conjoined with adverse risk factors (eg smoking) from the mid-80s.

For anything else, life expectancy is typically five years or more. For instance, ...

All very well, but we are left with what looks like an approaching anomaly where people are still dying of covid and yet the death rate is back to five year average.

Of course this is an average, so it may be that actually this year would have been a lower overall death rate than recent years so some unknown quirk of life and nature.

I was only putting forward one possible suggestion.

It's not an anomaly. At peak, we were running at over 5k Covid deaths per week just in hospitals, which is significant compared with the baseline of around 10k for this time of year (ie a doubling). We're now down to more like 1-2k per week, which is basically what that chart shows. There's no reason to extrapolate the declining trend and assume that it will soon dip below the long run average.

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

BannedinnParis said:

In other news, listened to an interesting documentary about other times the US was in a crisis or effectively locked down - mostly pandemic or environmentally related.


1775-82, smallpox epidemic
1816, the year without summer
1893, the panic of 1893
1918-19 spanish flu
1931-36 dustbowl (on top of depression)
1942-3ish, east coast dim outs

Sounds an interesting programme. Had never heard of either of the Year without Summer nor the Panic of 1893.

Who cares less what some leftie journalist on the Independent thinks. Boris is the most successful Tory election winner since Thatcher, they only want him out as tgey are frightened of him

AlastairMeeks said:

CarlottaVance said:

It's RT I know - but it is an interesting question:

https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1262782569411739648?s=20

I'd understood that the value of Tesla was in the battery technology, not the cars themselves. Is that wrong?

RT misrepresenting what Dyson said (surprise, surprise).

He said it was not commercially iable.

IshmaelZ said:

CarlottaVance said:

It's RT I know - but it is an interesting question:

https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1262782569411739648?s=20

Is it? Who is the genius, the guy who made SpaceX happen or one who designed a marginally better sort of Hoover?

Counterfactual: if it's true that it's impossible, how long do you think Musk could carry on pretending it wasn't just because he hates admitting he's wrong? He does have somewhat of a history of taking liberties with the usual notions of good corporate governance (cf: his actions on investor calls, and interactions with the SEC).

On the flip side, he's hardly the only one trying to build electric vehicles. As far as I know, all the major conventional ICE manufacturers are working on this as well.

kinabalu said:

"The emotional maturity of a toddler" -

I think this is bang on for Trump but rather harsh for Johnson. He clearly is immature but he's not down at toddler level. More teenager.

As for him going this year - IMO only health or a sleaze scandal of huge proportions would cause that.

I think this is on the money. Whatever one can say about Boris, and there's a lot, he's clearly not as irrationally thin skinned as Trump, he's occasionally even called calculating.

As for him going, I'm not convinced even a sleaze scandal would do it. It'd not only have to be huge but involve him very personally and very publicly. I cannot conceive of such a thing, lest it is the old joke about being caught with a dead girl or a live boy. I suppose a formal charge of criminality, even if not proven, might be sufficient as I cannot see him going full Netanyahu and having the backing to resist that.

So health is the way.

IshmaelZ said:

CarlottaVance said:

It's RT I know - but it is an interesting question:

https://twitter.com/RT_com/status/1262782569411739648?s=20

Is it? Who is the genius, the guy who made SpaceX happen or one who designed a marginally better sort of Hoover?

That might be a unfair way of assessing the question, which was in any case unfair. Dyson has clearly been a very successful businessman, but his car venture seemed from the outside to come pretty much out of left field, whereas Tesla have been working at it for ages now.

RobD said:

Carnyx said:

Philip_Thompson said:

BannedinnParis said:

In other news, listened to an interesting documentary about other times the US was in a crisis or effectively locked down - mostly pandemic or environmentally related.


1775-82, smallpox epidemic
1816, the year without summer
1893, the panic of 1893
1918-19 spanish flu
1931-36 dustbowl (on top of depression)
1942-3ish, east coast dim outs

Year without summer?

That's a new one on me! Will need to read about that.

Google for Mount Tambora's eruption in 1815.

That would be the cherry on top if we had another eruption like that now.

Much more likely, and much more potentially disastrous, is a big landfall hurricane in Florida this summer.

Normally, these don't cause much loss of life any more* (or at least shouldn't, due to early warning weather systems and evacuations orders). Under the current circumstances, evacuating all the Miami care homes would be extremely difficult.

*Note: only true for the US. Typically still a lot of fatalities in Central America.

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

You got within 2 metres of Sean O'Grady, didn't you? You need to be very careful to interact with politically-deranged individuals only at an appropriate distance and in a safe manner, like on PB

HYUFD said:

Who cares less what some leftie journalist on the Independent thinks. Boris is the most successful Tory election winner since Thatcher, they only want him out as tgey are frightened of him

He is that, but the pandemic has dramatically changed the politics and economy

I am increasingly concerned that he has gone missing and it may be health related but we cannot be sure due to his reputation for avoiding scrutiny

He needs to step up and become visible again

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

I doubt it.

You could say the same thing about Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster

It is obvious that the testing issue and care homes are mirrored across the Country which seems to indicate all four were following the same advice

Also across Europe right? Care homes have been hit hard everywhere.

reports suggest Johnson is now bottling out of June 01 start for schools.

contrarian said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

I doubt it.

You could say the same thing about Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster

It is obvious that the testing issue and care homes are mirrored across the Country which seems to indicate all four were following the same advice

Also across Europe right? Care homes have been hit hard everywhere.

Indeed.

It is far wider than just at Boris's door

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

And how probable do you think that is? There will be many things that look like mistakes from the outset but any enquiry (and there will presumably be multiple ones looking at different things) even if expedited will take a long time, and there will huge amounts of complexity, and and of mistakes which were unavoidable alongside the ones which were avoidable, and the things which are a matter of perspective, and so on and so forth.

Add to that a huge majority and unless the blame is getting put on Boris personally and the party can be convinced he can be ditched and they will benefit from doing so (rather than suffer) then the idea he personally would have no choice but to leave early looks rather unlikely, since the governing party as a body getting any blame, if and when it comes, seems more likely than Boris getting it but the party avoiding any stigma from that.

It's obviously not impossible, but I really cannot see this path you've laid out wherein the Tories manage to insulate themselves from blame while Boris does not. And if the party is suffering as much as him then he has no reason to go quietly, and we know from May how long people can hang on.

The last point is a telling one. May managed to hang on for two years following electoral disaster, but suddenly Boris will be leaving within a year of electoral triumph? No way.

contrarian said:

reports suggest Johnson is now bottling out of June 01 start for schools.

Why dont they make it explicitly voluntary to start with - I know they have already said they wont impose fines, but going one step further probably helps calm things down.

If there are fewer kids then it gives time for schools to adjust and create the right protocols and environments.

If everyone shows then its the same as they intended anyway.

Whats to lose?

BluestBlue said:

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

And how probable do you think that is? There will be many things that look like mistakes from the outset but any enquiry (and there will presumably be multiple ones looking at different things) even if expedited will take a long time, and there will huge amounts of complexity, and and of mistakes which were unavoidable alongside the ones which were avoidable, and the things which are a matter of perspective, and so on and so forth.

Add to that a huge majority and unless the blame is getting put on Boris personally and the party can be convinced he can be ditched and they will benefit from doing so (rather than suffer) then the idea he personally would have no choice but to leave early looks rather unlikely, since the governing party as a body getting any blame, if and when it comes, seems more likely than Boris getting it but the party avoiding any stigma from that.

It's obviously not impossible, but I really cannot see this path you've laid out wherein the Tories manage to insulate themselves from blame while Boris does not. And if the party is suffering as much as him then he has no reason to go quietly, and we know from May how long people can hang on.

The last point is a telling one. May managed to hang on for two years following electoral disaster, but suddenly Boris will be leaving within a year of electoral triumph? No way.

As I have said health may see him stand down, so it is possible but I hope he recovers fully and comes out fighting. He needs to

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

contrarian said:

Pick for Britain really is redolent of one of those old Maoist 5-year plans isn't it?

No.

It is a practical answer to an urgent need

Six players and staff from 3 premier league clubs test positive for covid and are in isolation

How on earth can the premier league think it can restart in a month ?

contrarian said:

Pick for Britain really is redolent of one of those old Maoist 5-year plans isn't it?

I expect there will be a battalion of pensioners nostalgic for the fruit-picking of their youth stepping forward.

IshmaelZ said:

noneoftheabove said:

IshmaelZ said:

noneoftheabove said:

Philip_Thompson said:

noneoftheabove said:

Philip_Thompson said:

eek said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

No. Factories can manufacture to more than just one spec and do all the time. That's how Asian manufacturers can export across the whole globe, they understand the spec and manufacture to that. One factory can produce more than one spec of product.

Yes, and the products made for sale in the EU have to adhere to the legal trading standards set by the EU. Brexiteers insist that won't apply to Britain after we leave. Its bollocks and they know it.

Not that we plan on downgrading EU standards of course. So they insist. So adhering to said EU standards which we choose to have as UK standards would be a good plan. Which would mean easy access to the EEA, no border down the Irish Sea etc etc. But can't have that because wazzocks.

If we want to vary our standards we will be able to do so. Companies already make a plethora of models of products, if they want to manufacture a GB model of a product to be sold in GB then there is no reason they can't do that while still also manufacturing EU models to be sold in the EU.

Ever heard of benefits of scale (you may remember it from such things as the pin manufacturing in Adam Smiths Wealth of Nations). Unless you think Britain should have poorer quality goods how do you think savings would be made?

Manufacturers can do scale by using common components in both where possible while using other components where it isn't possible. As they already do!

Its remarkable how car companies for instance can manufacture Vauxhall specification cars for the UK and manufacture Opel specification cars for the EU. And they did even when we were in the EU because the Vauxhall brand suited the UK.

If you ask Vauxhall could they build their cars cheaper if they didnt have to do LHD and RHD models, what would their answer be?

Does it matter?

They are capable of doing both models. Just as any variance in our standards will see manufacturers capable of producing multiple models.

Manufacturers already do produce multiple models. What matters is whether consumer demand is there.

Yes not all of us have unlimited money so prefer things cheaper when there is no particular benefit to lots of separate standards, it is the consumer who loses.

A bit. But Lhd vs rhd is rather a good point: it is an existing example of a UK spec which is about as awkward and expensive as one can easily imagine, but which manufacturing seems to cope with ok.

Cope is an apt choice of word. No one would have designed it like this, it is a quirk of history that costs everyone that can no longer be cheaply solved.

Why look to create more of those scenarios?

Well, because you don't want rules imposed on you by external parties. That is not an argument I have any sympathy with, but the claim that manufacturing just can't produce things to a separate UK spec, "and I know this because I am an expert," is just demolished by the fact that we can have any vehicle we like in RHD without paying a premium over what LHD costs.

How do you know that? How many UK car showrooms have LHD and RHD models on offer so you can directly compare prices?

slade said:

Off topic but BBC2 are running a series of 'silver screen classics' at 3pm all week. Yesterday was John Ford's Wagon Master from 1950. Today it was rare Fred Astaire (with Jon Leslie not Ginger Rogers) called The Sky's the Limit from 1943. Best moment is the solo Astaire performance of 'One more for the road' where he virtually destroys the set. Tomorrow it's Vivacious Lady with Jimmy Stewart and Ginger Rogers. Thursday it's Beautiful but Dangerous with Jean Simmons. Friday is the big finish with Astaire and Rogers in Carefree (watch out for Astaire showing his prowess at golf).

Sorry- Joan Leslie.

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

So what could have done different ?

Restriction on migration, quarantine etc ? Yes but the entire political class seems opposed to that.

An earlier lockdown ? Possibly but only by a few days and there was little to stop people doing so themselves, as indeed many did.

A big push push earlier on testing ? Yes but this was a failure of the NHS / DoH / PHE alphabet soup.

Care homes ? A lack of dynamic leadership from the government but the real responsibility lies with crass decisions at operational levels.

A big early push on PPE ? Possibly but that would go against the globalist mindset dominant in government.

A clearer strategy ? Possibly but this goes back to the scientists and their models.

Messaging - did 'protect the NHS' lead to extra non-covid deaths ? Possibly but would an alternative have been riskier ?

Now what did the government do well on ? Nightingales, ventilators, furloughs and belatedly testing.

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

It is not a popularity contest

Nicola had a grilling today and her problem with ground zero in Edinburgh in february and the care homes crisis in Scotland is not going to go away, despite patient confidentiality

Philip_Thompson said:

Manufacturers can do scale by using common components in both where possible while using other components where it isn't possible. As they already do!

Indeed. I can only speak for the industry I have experience in (electronics) but I presume it's not to different for any form of manufacturing; almost all efficiencies of scale come from bulk purchasing a limited number of components. When working on a new product one of the overriding design goals is always to use components that are already in use in another model, where and when that is possible without compromising functionality.

There is an additional manufacturing cost involved in building two models rather then one, but if they employ all the same major components that cost is fairly trivial.

An example people will be familiar with is Samsung mobile phones. A 'Galaxy so-and-so' that you buy in the UK may well have completely different internals from a US or Chinese phone of apparently the same model. Would it be cheaper for Samsung to have one universal design? Yes, but not enough to offset the benefits they see in having varying designs for each market.

The idea that any slight change to a design instantly kills volume efficiency is not remotely correct. When manufacturing at very large volumes the opposite often becomes true; it's sensible to have multiple, varying designs so that an interruption in supply of a critical part doesn't kill your entire output stone dead.

(and.. first post! Hello everyone!)

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

That's a voodoo poll, FOR SHAME.

One that no one apart from readers of the Press Gazette knew about.

If anyone was going to infest a voodoo poll I'd put money on the glassy eyed acolytes of BJ currently.

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

That's a voodoo poll, FOR SHAME.

One that no one apart from readers of the Press Gazette knew about.

If anyone was going to infest a voodoo poll I'd put money on the glassy eyed acolytes of BJ currently.

Your fellow Nats have a history on infesting voodoo polls.

I even did a PB thread on it.

https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/09/05/your-regular-reminder-on-why-should-ignore-self-selecting-polls-aka-voodoo-polls/

IshmaelZ said:

noneoftheabove said:

IshmaelZ said:

noneoftheabove said:

Philip_Thompson said:

noneoftheabove said:

Philip_Thompson said:

eek said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

No. Factories can manufacture to more than just one spec and do all the time. That's how Asian manufacturers can export across the whole globe, they understand the spec and manufacture to that. One factory can produce more than one spec of product.

Yes, and the products made for sale in the EU have to adhere to the legal trading standards set by the EU. Brexiteers insist that won't apply to Britain after we leave. Its bollocks and they know it.

Not that we plan on downgrading EU standards of course. So they insist. So adhering to said EU standards which we choose to have as UK standards would be a good plan. Which would mean easy access to the EEA, no border down the Irish Sea etc etc. But can't have that because wazzocks.

If we want to vary our standards we will be able to do so. Companies already make a plethora of models of products, if they want to manufacture a GB model of a product to be sold in GB then there is no reason they can't do that while still also manufacturing EU models to be sold in the EU.

Ever heard of benefits of scale (you may remember it from such things as the pin manufacturing in Adam Smiths Wealth of Nations). Unless you think Britain should have poorer quality goods how do you think savings would be made?

Manufacturers can do scale by using common components in both where possible while using other components where it isn't possible. As they already do!

Its remarkable how car companies for instance can manufacture Vauxhall specification cars for the UK and manufacture Opel specification cars for the EU. And they did even when we were in the EU because the Vauxhall brand suited the UK.

If you ask Vauxhall could they build their cars cheaper if they didnt have to do LHD and RHD models, what would their answer be?

Does it matter?

They are capable of doing both models. Just as any variance in our standards will see manufacturers capable of producing multiple models.

Manufacturers already do produce multiple models. What matters is whether consumer demand is there.

Yes not all of us have unlimited money so prefer things cheaper when there is no particular benefit to lots of separate standards, it is the consumer who loses.

A bit. But Lhd vs rhd is rather a good point: it is an existing example of a UK spec which is about as awkward and expensive as one can easily imagine, but which manufacturing seems to cope with ok.

Cope is an apt choice of word. No one would have designed it like this, it is a quirk of history that costs everyone that can no longer be cheaply solved.

Why look to create more of those scenarios?

Well, because you don't want rules imposed on you by external parties. That is not an argument I have any sympathy with, but the claim that manufacturing just can't produce things to a separate UK spec, "and I know this because I am an expert," is just demolished by the fact that we can have any vehicle we like in RHD without paying a premium over what LHD costs.

Rules are imposed on all beings on this planet by all sorts of external forces. I dont try and fight that reality.

I have never claimed people cant produce something to a UK spec. It obviously just depends on not making the spec impossible. I am pointing out that there is an economic cost to consumers from having various standards and on top of that we are losing a trade deal with the worlds largest single market in order to have the right to impose that cost on ourselves.

Black_Rook said:

RobD said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/DomWalsh13/status/1262735725532860418?s=20

As a non-expert in trade negotiations, isn't wording that has already been agreed with another country a good place to start?

This is irrelevant, as the EU doesn't want the same relationship with the UK as it does with Canada.

The EU wants the UK firmly in its regulatory orbit. The kind of relationship that the UK actually wants, which is relatively loose, isn't worth either the EU sacrificing the level of control that it is demanding, or the UK granting the EU that level of control, which it is determined not to concede.

The logic of the position is that both parties will walk away.

Yes I think that is quite likely.

What will be interesting will be the reaction of governments of the EU27 when that happens, specifically whether they continue to be content to leave things to Barnier to continue down that path as the clock ticks down, as he will be seen to have failed.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

It is not a popularity contest

Nicola had a grilling today and her problem with ground zero in Edinburgh in february and the care homes crisis in Scotland is not going to go away, despite patient confidentiality

I think you'll find that politics is very often a popularity contest. In fact you should know that as you were cockahoop when BJ won his last popularity contest, limited as that popularity was to England and Wales.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Seems like today is voodoo poll day.

That's every day, so long as it serves the point I want to make.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Six players and staff from 3 premier league clubs test positive for covid and are in isolation

How on earth can the premier league think it can restart in a month ?

German football is back, some players have and will continue to test positive. It is not a particular problem because the test track and trace systems in broader society are working.

If we can get to that stage in the UK then football will be fine, if we cant we have bigger problems to worry about than football.

IshmaelZ said:

contrarian said:

Pick for Britain really is redolent of one of those old Maoist 5-year plans isn't it?

Dig for Victory is a perfectly good uk precedent.

That Harry chap (Harry Who?) who has trashed his reputation and marketing position by a perfect combination of terrible judgement and bad luck could regain some of it by spending 3 months picking fruit and cutting veg in front of TV cameras. And he would be obeying dad.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

These daily conference have become a waste of time

2 or 3 times a week at max

I disagree. Some of the questions were quite probing, and the answers in some ways interesting.

Notable was Eustace’s answer about the discharge policy - long on bluster and short on fact.
We don’t accept the caricature that we took an approach that was wrong.

Very early on in this epidemic we had protocols in place for care homes, there was guidance as to how they should approach things...

Angela McLean, in contrast, said she would have to check the facts before giving any such answer.

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

The only people who can get rid of Boris are tory MPs and I haven;t seen much evidence they are unhappy about the care home crisis.

What they are unhappy about is the economy and the snail's pace emergence from lockdown.

Nicola was having a hard time on the Nike conference in Edinburgh and nursing homes today.

She has as many questions as does Boris and Hancock but her conferences do not get UK wide coverage

No, Sturgeon has many more questions than Boris and Hancock because she hardly ever delegates the task of facing up to them onto the B, C and indeed Z team. Still, doesn't seem to be doing her too much harm.

https://twitter.com/GordonMackie5/status/1262783412793946113?s=20

'Nicola Sturgeon voted 'most impressive politician' in poll

The SNP leader took 29% of the vote, coming out on top just ahead of Chancellor Rishi Sunak on 24% and newly elected Labour leader Keir Starmer on 23%.

Meanwhile just 14% of those surveys selected Boris Johnson, just 3% picked Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Dominic Raab, who stepped in as the PM’s replacement while he was in hospital with Covid-19, took less than 3%.'

It is not a popularity contest

Nicola had a grilling today and her problem with ground zero in Edinburgh in february and the care homes crisis in Scotland is not going to go away, despite patient confidentiality

I think you'll find that politics is very often a popularity contest. In fact you should know that as you were cockahoop when BJ won his last popularity contest, limited as that popularity was to England and Wales.

The Scots had a big chance to make sure that their PM was always exactly the one the Scots wanted. How interesting that they didn't take it.

An arts centre in Bromsgrove has gone out of business.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artrix,_Bromsgrove
https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/18456209.letter-day-arts-dying-painful-death/

contrarian said:

Sunak's comments today include the stunning forecast that the unemployment from this crisis will create a million people with chronic health conditions (quoted in the Times).

A Million.

In his interview he also explicitly said it was lockdown (and not the virus) that was creating this massive strain on the economy.

Is someone in the government finally, finally coming around to the idea if squaring with the public on the choices we face?

Or of course you could speculate (for that is what it is) that as many as 65 million people in the UK will avoid the chronic health conditions which are the unavoidable outcome of a world pandemic.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

contrarian said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Andy_JS said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OllyT said:

BluestBlue said:

Sean O'Grady is suffering from an extreme case of Boris Derangement Syndrome. Unless they are physically disabled, Prime Ministers with large majorities don't just decide to give up no matter how difficult the circumstances, especially this early in their terms.

My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.

He will do a runner before there is any chance of holding him accountable for his handling of the pandemic or the consequences of Brexit.

He dodges accountability during the best of times and we are very far from the best of times right now. He will claim it is for health reasons but really that will be just another in a long line of lies.

It will be sooner if it is his health

Otherwise I expect him to continue in office

If it's found that the government has made a lot of serious mistakes with regard to the handling of the virus he may have no choice but to leave early, even if he wasn't personally responsible.

I doubt it.

You could say the same thing about Sturgeon, Drakeford and Foster

It is obvious that the testing issue and care homes are mirrored across the Country which seems to indicate all four were following the same advice

Also across Europe right? Care homes have been hit hard everywhere.

Indeed.

It is far wider than just at Boris's door

Some, like Cuomo, have acknowledged their mistakes.

Black_Rook said:

contrarian said:

Sunak's comments today include the stunning forecast that the unemployment from this crisis will create a million people with chronic health conditions (quoted in the Times).

A Million.

In his interview he also explicitly said it was lockdown (and not the virus) that was creating this massive strain on the economy.

Is someone in the government finally, finally coming around to the idea if squaring with the public on the choices we face?

Hopefully so, because they're going to have to do it sooner or later. Therefore, the sooner, the better.

Unless the mass vaccination by mid-Autumn scenario comes to pass, then the furlough scheme is going to get wound down when the disease is still in circulation to a greater or lesser extent. Anyone lucky enough to still be in a job by that point and who hasn't yet gone back to it is going to have to do so, or give it up in favour of someone who will. We'll have to learn to live with the virus as a managed risk.

The pressure to extend furlough again will be enormous.

Nigelb said:

We had the same capacity as South Korea.
We just let it get out of control to the point where the capacity was inadequate.

Doesn't look like it:

Had word today that a major & extremely well funded UK university is rolling out a big redunacy scheme, god only know what will happen to the mid / lower tier institutions.

That magic money forest is going to need some more harvesting.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Had word today that a major & extremely well funded UK university is rolling out a big redunacy scheme, god only know what will happen to the mid / lower tier institutions.

That magic money forest is going to need some more harvesting.

That'll suck for the non-tenured faculty.

TGOHF666 said:

Some dumb ass questions from jouros today.

"Did you abandon testing thousands of people in March because you didn't have the capacity ?"

Yes.

"So it wasn't guided by science ?"....

Why did they say it was "guided by the science" at the time then (Apart from this was being used for everything) ?