politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Does this Indy writer have a point – is Boris now really that
Comments
-
0
-
Stay classy, tyson.tyson said:
I've sent you a message....100 quid.....coach said:
I know exactly what they think, that it was a terrible mistake. I campaigned to Leave, I don't hate foreigners, in fact I don't hate anybody.OllyT said:
and Leavers refuse to believe what Remainers thinks Brexit says about us as a nation.coach said:
Remainers still refusing to believe why most people voted LeaveFoxy said:
Thats the thing about Brexitism, it is so driven by hate, not just of foreigners but also of much of modern Britain. Nothing good can come of it.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.
I do get upset when people tell me what to think
Let me know if you agree....
Good night to the other muppets here0 -
I have now!TheScreamingEagles said:
Have you seen the shit the GOP have pulled in Georgia?Alistair said:
https://twitter.com/kaysteiger/status/12627356808259338240 -
I'm sure you would if you had a flag...Theuniondivvie said:
I don't think getting a stauner over your fleg is evil, just a bit weird. Quite a lot weird actually, but whatever.BluestBlue said:
Ah yes, Mr. All-Nationalism-Is-Evil-Unless-It's-My-Nationalism...Theuniondivvie said:
I think whatever was stirring, it wasn't Elgar.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.0 -
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1262847803971317762another_richard said:
Wasn't the herd immunity strategy initially advocated by the scientists ?OllyT said:
Not dithering around with a herd immunity strategy for the first week once they did start to get their finger out might have been a start.another_richard said:
But what mistakes were other countries known to be doing in February ?OllyT said:
I remain convinced that during the last 2 weeks of February when Boris went AWOl at Chevening to sort out his private life, we missed the opportunity to really get on top of what was happening around the world and learn from the mistakes others were making.another_richard said:
So what could have done different ?Andy_JS said:
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.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will be sooner if it is his healthOllyT said:
My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.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.
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.
Otherwise I expect him to continue in office
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.
Boris did not wake up to the danger early enough and we have been playing catch up ever since and are probably going to end up with about the worst outcome in Europe. This will also knock on to the economic impact because I expect we will be last European nation to properly come out of lockdown.
In Italy the first death was on 21/02/20 and that had risen to 29 by the end of February.
In Spain there were no deaths until 08/03/20 and only 81 known cases by the end of February.
So what could the government have done in February ?
Make an effort to get PPE and testing organised better ? Possibly.
Warn people not to leave the country ? Ideally but in reality no government was going to do that.
At the end of the day we were not in the vanguard of infection in Europe and if, despite that, we end up with about the worst performance in Europe who else do you blame if not the government?
If we want to start discussing blame then the NHS / DoH / PHE alphabet soup deserves much of it for their operational fuckups.
Or more generally our globalist establishment, which does include our government, which saw no problem with the UK being dependent upon imported PPE and for whom restrictions on international travel was anathema.0 -
£100 at Evens? I've discovered tonight your knowledge of betting markets.tyson said:
I've sent you a message....100 quid.....coach said:
I know exactly what they think, that it was a terrible mistake. I campaigned to Leave, I don't hate foreigners, in fact I don't hate anybody.OllyT said:
and Leavers refuse to believe what Remainers thinks Brexit says about us as a nation.coach said:
Remainers still refusing to believe why most people voted LeaveFoxy said:
Thats the thing about Brexitism, it is so driven by hate, not just of foreigners but also of much of modern Britain. Nothing good can come of it.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.
I do get upset when people tell me what to think
Let me know if you agree....
Good night to the other muppets here
I'll pass thanks, you clearly don't trust your own predictions0 -
Starmer was lucky in that Corbyn's defeat was so heavy and that RLB was so unfit for leadership.tyson said:
I agree with you....mostly....another_richard said:
Someone of 'his talent' who keeps missing open goals.tyson said:
Starmer is in for the marathon.....he sat in Corbyn's table for 3 years or so...and that must have been excruciating for someone of his talent....another_richard said:
Given the open goals he has missed I need some convincing about Starmer's 'competence'.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Starmer is the best of the best...
Rushi is promising....and Hunt is solid...so perhaps all is not lost for the Tories to find a capable someone to replace Johnson when he is shoved or pushed....
Here's some well meant advice - don't become a politician's fanboy, they are never as good as you think they are.
What turned me towards Keir wasn't his backstory, the fact that he is a working class lad who rose to the top of his profession that is dominated by public schools, or the fact that he has championed social justice.....
It was the fact that he suffered Corbyn...survived and landslided a leadership election within a left infiltrated Labour Party that had almost become irrelevant.....
The next step....getting rid of this ramshackle Govt looks to be easy pickings by comparison....
And by saying he was lucky I mean no criticism - there is nothing more important in life than luck.0 -
No. If our performance is the worst in Europe the buck stops with the Government. They will get little sympathy by trying to hang the scientists out to dry.another_richard said:
Wasn't the herd immunity strategy initially advocated by the scientists ?OllyT said:
Not dithering around with a herd immunity strategy for the first week once they did start to get their finger out might have been a start.another_richard said:
But what mistakes were other countries known to be doing in February ?OllyT said:
I remain convinced that during the last 2 weeks of February when Boris went AWOl at Chevening to sort out his private life, we missed the opportunity to really get on top of what was happening around the world and learn from the mistakes others were making.another_richard said:
So what could have done different ?Andy_JS said:
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.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will be sooner if it is his healthOllyT said:
My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.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.
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.
Otherwise I expect him to continue in office
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.
Boris did not wake up to the danger early enough and we have been playing catch up ever since and are probably going to end up with about the worst outcome in Europe. This will also knock on to the economic impact because I expect we will be last European nation to properly come out of lockdown.
In Italy the first death was on 21/02/20 and that had risen to 29 by the end of February.
In Spain there were no deaths until 08/03/20 and only 81 known cases by the end of February.
So what could the government have done in February ?
Make an effort to get PPE and testing organised better ? Possibly.
Warn people not to leave the country ? Ideally but in reality no government was going to do that.
At the end of the day we were not in the vanguard of infection in Europe and if, despite that, we end up with about the worst performance in Europe who else do you blame if not the government?
If we want to start discussing blame then the NHS / DoH / PHE alphabet soup deserves much of it for their operational fuckups.
Or more generally our globalist establishment, which does include our government, which saw no problem with the UK being dependent upon imported PPE and for whom restrictions on international travel was anathema.0 -
Ah well that's going to really get the BBC fighting fit for the 21st century.FrancisUrquhart said:
Front pages tomorrow, BBC going to cut funding to BBC 1 and 4, focusing on getting da yuff market.Andy_JS said:
It was reported a few days ago that they were thinking of scrapping BBC4, (which is the one BBC channel I tend to watch a lot).FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
YouTube - No cost - Billions of videos watched daily. Whatever you want on demand 24/7
Netflix - Half the cost of the Licence Fee - Tens of thousands of TV shows, Movies etc. Whatever you want on demand 24/7
TikTok - Ummm my wife can explain this one but yes it's there and popular.
BBC Three - Five hours of airtime per day with 4 decent shows we can think of from last two decades.
Yeah the youth are really going to dump TikTok, YouTube, Netflix and embrace the Licence Fee for BBC Three ...2 -
The Brexit Party?BluestBlue said:
Only one party was found guilty of hating Britain recently, and it was duly obliterated by the electorate...Foxy said:
Thats the thing about Brexitism, it is so driven by hate, not just of foreigners but also of much of modern Britain. Nothing good can come of it.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.0 -
I really cannot remember the last time I watched standard TV. May be some time in a hotel a couple of years ago.FrancisUrquhart said:
I really don't get the thinking. These days basically every tv is a smart tv, so you can install iPlayer (and if not you can get a firestick or all the other options for peanuts). The idea of channels is so last decade.Philip_Thompson said:
I think it would be very funny to see BBC Three brought back and BBC Four scrapped, only for the howls of outrage from some.FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
Plus, da yuff don't watch traditional telly. They watch YouTube and then some streaming stuff.
Even live streaming by is something I do very rarely. I did watch Merkels 1st Corona address to the nation and about once a year I watch the Tagesschau (national news) live.1 -
The constituency in that area, Vale of Glamorgan, registered the closest result at the 1992 election, a Tory win by 19 votes. Useless psephological fact.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I also went to Barry Island station the same dayeristdoof said:
I know what I did on that day. I was not in Penarth.Sunil_Prasannan said:
My only visit to Penarth station was on 4th June 2018.eadric said:
You really want to know? It is related to covid. But it may come across as boasting*Andy_JS said:
Why did you decide on Penarth as a place to stay during the lockdown?eadric said:Gloriously sunburned from a walk in the Welsh hills. Finishing off a frankly kick-arse memoir. Drunk as a lunk on fine Puglia red. The sun sets behind the Black Mountains. Unlockdown looms.
There have, to be honest, been worse times. I may have to finish off with the St Henri 2005
*which I obviously hate
1 -
UKIP and the BNP also fit.SandyRentool said:
The Brexit Party?BluestBlue said:
Only one party was found guilty of hating Britain recently, and it was duly obliterated by the electorate...Foxy said:
Thats the thing about Brexitism, it is so driven by hate, not just of foreigners but also of much of modern Britain. Nothing good can come of it.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.0 -
Agreed.Foxy said:If you want an enquiry to be useful, then don't look for blame, look for how things could have been done better.
Its never going to be like that though. It will either be a whitewash or an indictment, depending whether done by this government or the next. Political enquiries are just weapons, nothing more.0 -
How revealing that you think not having a flag is a grievous thing.BluestBlue said:
I'm sure you would if you had a flag...Theuniondivvie said:
I don't think getting a stauner over your fleg is evil, just a bit weird. Quite a lot weird actually, but whatever.BluestBlue said:
Ah yes, Mr. All-Nationalism-Is-Evil-Unless-It's-My-Nationalism...Theuniondivvie said:
I think whatever was stirring, it wasn't Elgar.OnlyLivingBoy said:
I feel that comment should have a union jack fluttering in the background, and something stirring, perhaps a bit of Elgar, on the soundtrack. Mindless, unquestioning patriotism isn't my thing, personally. If you love something, you should want it to be better. It's sad to see the country being so comprehensively trashed by this incompetent, malignant gang of fools.BluestBlue said:
'With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?'tyson said:
I'm in Oxford.........Philip_Thompson said:
I think you're talking bullshit personally, and since you're a Brit in Italy who loves to talk down Britain its hardly surprising people share anti-British stuff they see with you. Doesn't mean squat and says more about you than anything else.tyson said:
No...he doesn't actually....I think Fanfani was a 4 time Italian PM, and he's someone I don't do politics with.....Philip_Thompson said:
But no doubt they know you are a diehard lefty.tyson said:
I get bombarded by articles and references from Italian friends and family....one is a close relative of Fanfani...hardly a diehard leftyPhilip_Thompson said:
No, Donald Trump is an international joke and laughing stock.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Britain is just a normal country with a normal government. Its not as special as you make out.
My wife's cousin is a regional police chief...and loves Salvini...and he sends us stuff from Italy that ridicules the UK....
Brexit made us a pariah.....but Covid has just made us look pathetic in a sad way....
the UK...the sick man of Europe....thank you
With Brexit...and now our Covid response.....how could you not feel anything other than sadness for what has happened to the UK?
Granted...the US have Trump and Brazil have dickwad.....
But....we have the worst Govt in mainstream Europe and everyone knows it
Because it's going to take a hell of a lot more than a democratic decision or some fucking virus to reduce the pride I feel in my country by a micron, that's how.
Keep mopping son.0 -
Except Starmer went to public schooltyson said:
I agree with you....mostly....another_richard said:
Someone of 'his talent' who keeps missing open goals.tyson said:
Starmer is in for the marathon.....he sat in Corbyn's table for 3 years or so...and that must have been excruciating for someone of his talent....another_richard said:
Given the open goals he has missed I need some convincing about Starmer's 'competence'.tyson said:
Thanks...but hardly ringing endorsements.....BluestBlue said:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/who-won-pmqs-jeremy-corbyn-20756908tyson said:
When? Please reference itBluestBlue said:
Even Corbyn was occasionally touted as having had a 'good' PMQs by the media. It didn't help him much.DecrepiterJohnL said:
The point is that Boris had a bad one. Again. And that won't have escaped his backbenchers. Or Boris himself. After all, he was there.BluestBlue said:
What, the novelty of Labour having a good PMQs once in a decade?Scott_xP said:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/27/pmqs-verdict-corbyn-scores-well-with-labours-greatest-hits
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/pmqs-david-camerons-behaviour-was-a-lot-uglier-than-jeremy-corbyns-suit-a6893496.html
I think you'll find that Keir is the real deal...he survived the utter cataclysm that befell the Labour Party under Corbyn (I still get PTSD thinking of Corbyn as my leader).....
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
Starmer is the best of the best...
Rushi is promising....and Hunt is solid...so perhaps all is not lost for the Tories to find a capable someone to replace Johnson when he is shoved or pushed....
Here's some well meant advice - don't become a politician's fanboy, they are never as good as you think they are.
What turned me towards Keir wasn't his backstory, the fact that he is a working class lad who rose to the top of his profession that is dominated by public schools, or the fact that he has championed social justice.....
It was the fact that he suffered Corbyn...survived and landslided a leadership election within a left infiltrated Labour Party that had almost become irrelevant.....
The next step....getting rid of this ramshackle Govt looks to be easy pickings by comparison....1 -
Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...2 -
The government should be blamed for mistakes they have made - this should happen whatever the comparison with other countries is.OllyT said:
No. If our performance is the worst in Europe the buck stops with the Government. They will get little sympathy by trying to hang the scientists out to dry.another_richard said:
Wasn't the herd immunity strategy initially advocated by the scientists ?OllyT said:
Not dithering around with a herd immunity strategy for the first week once they did start to get their finger out might have been a start.another_richard said:
But what mistakes were other countries known to be doing in February ?OllyT said:
I remain convinced that during the last 2 weeks of February when Boris went AWOl at Chevening to sort out his private life, we missed the opportunity to really get on top of what was happening around the world and learn from the mistakes others were making.another_richard said:
So what could have done different ?Andy_JS said:
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.Big_G_NorthWales said:
It will be sooner if it is his healthOllyT said:
My money is firmly on Johnson resigning before the end of 2022.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.
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.
Otherwise I expect him to continue in office
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.
Boris did not wake up to the danger early enough and we have been playing catch up ever since and are probably going to end up with about the worst outcome in Europe. This will also knock on to the economic impact because I expect we will be last European nation to properly come out of lockdown.
In Italy the first death was on 21/02/20 and that had risen to 29 by the end of February.
In Spain there were no deaths until 08/03/20 and only 81 known cases by the end of February.
So what could the government have done in February ?
Make an effort to get PPE and testing organised better ? Possibly.
Warn people not to leave the country ? Ideally but in reality no government was going to do that.
At the end of the day we were not in the vanguard of infection in Europe and if, despite that, we end up with about the worst performance in Europe who else do you blame if not the government?
If we want to start discussing blame then the NHS / DoH / PHE alphabet soup deserves much of it for their operational fuckups.
Or more generally our globalist establishment, which does include our government, which saw no problem with the UK being dependent upon imported PPE and for whom restrictions on international travel was anathema.
Likewise other individuals and organisations.
If that doesn't happen then there is little chance those other individuals and organisations will learn from their mistakes.0 -
The Republican convention is still going ahead in August thoughFrancisUrquhart said:Labour's annual party conference has been cancelled due to the coronavirus crisis and will be replaced with online events.
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/rnc-2020/article241977831.html
0 -
I now have two more episodes of Normal People to go. I am not normally one for TV miniseries, but this is exceptionally good. Very nuanced characterisation and scripting. Painfully beautiful to watch.Anabobazina said:
Good. There are several million channels of complete shite. Beeb 3 might not be the best channel in the world, but it’s better than most of them.FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
2 -
It’s KeirLuckyguy1983 said:
Who cares why it's happening? It's more justice for the victims of grooming, more rapists put away. If it so happens that Priti Patel enhances her standing and Kier Starmer faces some difficult questions, so be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Aka Priti's got a cause.Andy_JS said:New Priti Patel tweet.
https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1262793932259328001
I'm sure it won't be a distraction from all the other stuff, eg being a bit crap and unpopular.
K
E
I
R
F
F
S0 -
"chances of us having a vaccine are extraordinary" - Trump0
-
High or low?rottenborough said:"chances of us having a vaccine are extraordinary" - Trump
0 -
That’s an excellent article, the size of an outbreak could depend on how may superspreaders you have. It’s particularly odd that a large proportion of people don’t spread it at all.Nigelb said:Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...0 -
Who Keirs?Anabobazina said:
It’s KeirLuckyguy1983 said:
Who cares why it's happening? It's more justice for the victims of grooming, more rapists put away. If it so happens that Priti Patel enhances her standing and Kier Starmer faces some difficult questions, so be it.Theuniondivvie said:
Aka Priti's got a cause.Andy_JS said:New Priti Patel tweet.
https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1262793932259328001
I'm sure it won't be a distraction from all the other stuff, eg being a bit crap and unpopular.
K
E
I
R
F
F
S3 -
"I want to build a car from one country. We build a car from twelve countries" - Trump.
0 -
Why do we need any Beeb channels?Anabobazina said:
Good. There are several million channels of complete shite. Beeb 3 might not be the best channel in the world, but it’s better than most of them.FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
People are capable of streaming whatever they want. And for a fraction of the cost of the licence fee.
If people want Beeb channels then they should be free to pay for them if they wish to subscribe. Not sure many would subscribe at double the cost of Netflix in order to get BBC3.0 -
0
-
That wasn't necessary in this case because the assassin called 3 weeks in advance, detailing the precise time and place of their intended assassination.BluestBlue said:
They've 'caused' the square root of fuck all. Any more than failing to jump in front of an assassin's bullet 'causes' the victim's death.eadric said:
It’s 10.15pm. Past the lagershed.Philip_Thompson said:
"lynching tree"?eadric said:
PPE, border quarantine, masks, care homes, public education, asymptotic transmission, bad models, there is now enough evidence, prima facie, to say that some people and institutions failed on a scale that is criminal.Philip_Thompson said:
There's a scientific one, we lacked the testing capabilities they had. Oh well, we've built it now.eadric said:
No. This is the greatest public health error in a century. Is there any overwhelming economic/political reason we could not have handled this as well as Germany? No.Philip_Thompson said:
It seems some people are almost salivating at the prospect of an inquiry as an opportunity to apportion blame.Scott_xP said:
An inquiry should surely happen but the priority should be to learn lessons for next time, if there's a next time, more than finding a scapegoat to blame.
60,000 have died and maybe 100,000 will die eventually. Or more. And it looks very much like many equally advanced, forewarned nations will do a lot better
There has to be an inquiry. We spend a trillion quid on the Bloody Sunday inquiry, FFS, and this is several orders of magnitude more important.
My guess is that it will find groupthinking scientists and credulous politicians equally to blame, but of course I don’t know. I will not prejudge. But an inquiry there must be and the guilty, if there are any, must be brought to justice.
Banging on like a lunatic about bringing people to justice won't bring anyone back from the dead or save lives in the future. After SARS Asian nations learnt lessons for the future, now we should do the same.
But yes, it can wait. But yes, it can only wait a year or two. Then we need to string the lynching tree.
As I said, you sound like a lunatic.
I am confronted with the bleak and depressing fact that my government, and the scientific establishment it relies upon, is not fit for purpose and has caused tens of thousands of deaths unnecessarily.
Allow me a little black humour. No we should not lynch them. Drive them from public office and put them in jail? Yes.
0 -
As the article points out, it’s not that odd at all, though.NerysHughes said:
That’s an excellent article, the size of an outbreak could depend on how may superspreaders you have. It’s particularly odd that a large proportion of people don’t spread it at all.Nigelb said:Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...0 -
0
-
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1262808098214985728rottenborough said:
0 -
I think that a lot of hindsight bias is being applied in regards to calls for a future inquiry into the Covid fiasco. To my mind, the only real question worth asking is why (especially after Exercise Cygnus) was the government so ill-prepared across the board for the outbreak of a novel disease?
At a basic level, the protection of life from threats that the individual is not equipped to protect themselves from is one of the core raisons d'être of the nation state. We should ask ourselves some very searching questions about whether the government is ready to protect us from a whole host of other low-probability/high impacts events such as cyber-terrorism, climate change, malign foreign action etc.
But I doubt my wish will be granted and instead any inquiry will probably focus on the operational aspect of the government's response rather than the position they started from. With that in mind, whilst there have been numerous failings, the two main questions for me are:
1. Should we have locked down earlier?
2. Why on earth were elderly people discharged into care homes whilst symptomatic or without knowing their status, causing the disease to rip though a vulnerable population?
With 1, the government can probably get away with saying they were following The Science. This is basically true, even if I wish they had taken precautionary measures earlier. Additionally if this drags on for years the lockdown dates may not make that much difference to the overall death toll. We will likely end up around the same point in the table as Spain and Italy.
On 2 they have no defence and should rightly be excoriated for allowing this to happen.
0 -
It’s a masterpiece.Foxy said:
I now have two more episodes of Normal People to go. I am not normally one for TV miniseries, but this is exceptionally good. Very nuanced characterisation and scripting. Painfully beautiful to watch.Anabobazina said:
Good. There are several million channels of complete shite. Beeb 3 might not be the best channel in the world, but it’s better than most of them.FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
0 -
Yes, very interesting indeed. Indoor events with shouting, singing or physical exertion seem particularly hazardous, Much else in terms of social distancing may well be of limited spreading potential.Nigelb said:Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...0 -
As I am someone who has no understanding of how viruses work I find it very odd. You can have one man who could infect hundreds and hundreds who infect no one.Nigelb said:
As the article points out, it’s not that odd at all, though.NerysHughes said:
That’s an excellent article, the size of an outbreak could depend on how may superspreaders you have. It’s particularly odd that a large proportion of people don’t spread it at all.Nigelb said:Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...0 -
On 2 was it Boris or Hancock who were personally transferring possibly infected people to care homes ?barrypeanuts said:
I think that a lot of hindsight bias is being applied in regards to calls for a future inquiry into the Covid fiasco. To my mind, the only real question worth asking is why (especially after Exercise Cygnus) was the government so ill-prepared across the board for the outbreak of a novel disease?
At a basic level, the protection of life from threats that the individual is not equipped to protect themselves from is one of the core raisons d'être of the nation state. We should ask ourselves some very searching questions about whether the government is ready to protect us from a whole host of other low-probability/high impacts events such as cyber-terrorism, climate change, malign foreign action etc.
But I doubt my wish will be granted and instead any inquiry will probably focus on the operational aspect of the government's response rather than the position they started from. With that in mind, whilst there have been numerous failings, the two main questions for me are:
1. Should we have locked down earlier?
2. Why on earth were elderly people discharged into care homes whilst symptomatic or without knowing their status, causing the disease to rip though a vulnerable population?
With 1, the government can probably get away with saying they were following The Science. This is basically true, even if I wish they had taken precautionary measures earlier. Additionally if this drags on for years the lockdown dates may not make that much difference to the overall death toll. We will likely end up around the same point in the table as Spain and Italy.
On 2 they have no defence and should rightly be excoriated for allowing this to happen.
The government can certainly be criticised for insufficient dynamic leadership or an inattention to detail but there is plenty of blame to go around and much of it belongs at operational level - doctors, NHS bureaucrats, care home managers.
On your initial point on protection against potential risks - how much are people prepared to pay towards it and would they prefer an extra holiday instead ?0 -
It really is magnificent, and tragic. Love will tear us apart indeed.Anabobazina said:
It’s a masterpiece.Foxy said:
I now have two more episodes of Normal People to go. I am not normally one for TV miniseries, but this is exceptionally good. Very nuanced characterisation and scripting. Painfully beautiful to watch.Anabobazina said:
Good. There are several million channels of complete shite. Beeb 3 might not be the best channel in the world, but it’s better than most of them.FrancisUrquhart said:The BBC is hoping to bring back BBC Three as a regular TV channel, four years after it was taken off air and moved online.
0 -
barrypeanuts said:
To my mind, the only real question worth asking is why (especially after Exercise Cygnus) was the government so ill-prepared across the board for the outbreak of a novel disease?
What's astonishing is that a pandemic was top of the UK risk register - eg p9 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644968/UK_National_Risk_Register_2017.pdf - but while the government had all the theory mapped out, the implementation was woeful.
Fairly obvious that all government time over the last three years has been consumed with Brexit instead of dealing with the mundane reality of government.
Too much back patting like this instead.
"The United Kingdom has an enviable reputation for resilience. In a rapidly changing world, we are at the forefront of embracing new opportunities and seeking innovative solutions to emerging problems.
Resilience does not come easily but the UK has long experience. Call it what you will, but whether through the fabled ‘stiff upper lip’, ‘Blitz spirit’ or just a stubborn determination, our resilience can be seen at the forefront of our handling of emergencies. Within Government, this is based on robust risk management and tried and tested emergency response and recovery arrangements."
0 -
Is the people or the environment that generates super-spreading?NerysHughes said:There is still so much that we don’t know about this disease, the latest one being why some people are super spreaders. A better understanding of it and ways to treat it or vaccinate against it are far more important points than what someone did in good faith in the early stages of the outbreak of a brand new and very odd disease.
So, anybody who is contagious who plays beer pong is likely to pass it onto a fair number of people.0 -
-
-
It also seems that if you happen to have more super spreaders in your population then you will get a far bigger outbreak, which might explain why some countries have barely been touched and neighbouring countries have had a very bad outbreakFoxy said:
Yes, very interesting indeed. Indoor events with shouting, singing or physical exertion seem particularly hazardous, Much else in terms of social distancing may well be of limited spreading potential.Nigelb said:Interesting and perceptive article on superspreading.
Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all?
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all#
... But in real life, some people infect many others and others don’t spread the disease at all. In fact, the latter is the norm, Lloyd-Smith says: “The consistent pattern is that the most common number is zero. Most people do not transmit.”
That’s why in addition to R, scientists use a value called the dispersion factor (k), which describes how much a disease clusters. The lower k is, the more transmission comes from a small number of people. In a seminal 2005 Nature paper, Lloyd-Smith and co-authors estimated that SARS—in which superspreading played a major role—had a k of 0.16. The estimated k for MERS, which emerged in 2012, is about 0.25. In the flu pandemic of 1918, in contrast, the value was about one, indicating that clusters played less of a role.
Estimates of k for SARS-CoV-2 vary...0 -
Environment does play a part but the article does say some people just spread the virus much more than othersrcs1000 said:
Is the people or the environment that generates super-spreading?NerysHughes said:There is still so much that we don’t know about this disease, the latest one being why some people are super spreaders. A better understanding of it and ways to treat it or vaccinate against it are far more important points than what someone did in good faith in the early stages of the outbreak of a brand new and very odd disease.
So, anybody who is contagious who plays beer pong is likely to pass it onto a fair number of people.0 -
If you're not involved with Government I think it is very difficult to understand how badly coronavirus has strained the system, even in areas that aren't directly affected.
For example: in an MP's office, so far this May we've had over 3x the number of inquiries we had in May 2019, and we're anticipating it'll be 5x by the end of the month. And these aren't normal policy inquiries either - these are people losing their family members and friends, their businesses, their jobs, all their future plans. It is a relentless tide of people having their lives ruined. It is brutally depressing and our office is working 14 hour shifts and weekends to try and keep on top of everything, but even that isn't enough.
For a lot of inquiries we need to escalate to Government departments. Just as MP's offices have been swamped, those escalated inquiries have swamped the civil service, so we are only just getting ministerial responses to inquiries submitted at the end of March.
Obviously it's much worse for anyone who loses their job or business as a result of this pandemic, but it is becoming increasingly difficult for MPs' staff to perform properly, and I would not be surprised if some offices collapse in the next few months due to the physical and mental pressure.0 -
Does anyone know the number of new infections for the last few days ?0
-
I too know very little about it. But also find it odd and strangely fascinating to read about and speculate on.NerysHughes said:
Environment does play a part but the article does say some people just spread the virus much more than othersrcs1000 said:
Is the people or the environment that generates super-spreading?NerysHughes said:There is still so much that we don’t know about this disease, the latest one being why some people are super spreaders. A better understanding of it and ways to treat it or vaccinate against it are far more important points than what someone did in good faith in the early stages of the outbreak of a brand new and very odd disease.
So, anybody who is contagious who plays beer pong is likely to pass it onto a fair number of people.
Like one of those Unsolved Serial Murders documentaries.
Deeply unsettling but disturbingly, satisfyingly moreish.
It's even better because every side can produce an expert in the field to back up their suppositions.1 -
That verbiage is not a good look.JonathanD said:barrypeanuts said:
To my mind, the only real question worth asking is why (especially after Exercise Cygnus) was the government so ill-prepared across the board for the outbreak of a novel disease?
What's astonishing is that a pandemic was top of the UK risk register - eg p9 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644968/UK_National_Risk_Register_2017.pdf - but while the government had all the theory mapped out, the implementation was woeful.
Fairly obvious that all government time over the last three years has been consumed with Brexit instead of dealing with the mundane reality of government.
Too much back patting like this instead.
"The United Kingdom has an enviable reputation for resilience. In a rapidly changing world, we are at the forefront of embracing new opportunities and seeking innovative solutions to emerging problems.
Resilience does not come easily but the UK has long experience. Call it what you will, but whether through the fabled ‘stiff upper lip’, ‘Blitz spirit’ or just a stubborn determination, our resilience can be seen at the forefront of our handling of emergencies. Within Government, this is based on robust risk management and tried and tested emergency response and recovery arrangements."
I agree with you, with the slight caveat that this particular PM came into office 6 months or so before the outbreak. The wider point of course is that this shouldn't matter, the government should have a base level of preparedness whatever and whoever is in the driving seat.
Ironically, the institutional failings of the civil service is very much Cummings bag. I would imagine that Covid will simply reinforce his view on this.0 -
Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?0
-
And goes on to say that might be for a number of reasons.NerysHughes said:
Environment does play a part but the article does say some people just spread the virus much more than othersrcs1000 said:
Is the people or the environment that generates super-spreading?NerysHughes said:There is still so much that we don’t know about this disease, the latest one being why some people are super spreaders. A better understanding of it and ways to treat it or vaccinate against it are far more important points than what someone did in good faith in the early stages of the outbreak of a brand new and very odd disease.
So, anybody who is contagious who plays beer pong is likely to pass it onto a fair number of people.
It might be because they are shouting or singing in a confined space; that they are exercising vigorously and panting; that that coincides for the few days of the infection when they are producing the most virus - or just that they are one of those individuals who sheds more virus (though that again can be for a number of reasons).
Basically it’s complicated, and though we understand the general picture, we have a fairly poor understanding of the precise mechanics of how respiratory viruses are transmitted.
(And it’s quite hard to study that for potentially lethal viruses, as opposed to the common cold.)0 -
-
On 2 was it Boris or Hancock who were personally transferring possibly infected people to care homes ?
The government can certainly be criticised for insufficient dynamic leadership or an inattention to detail but there is plenty of blame to go around and much of it belongs at operational level - doctors, NHS bureaucrats, care home managers.
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
On your initial point on protection against potential risks - how much are people prepared to pay towards it and would they prefer an extra holiday instead ?
Yep, it's a toughie when you have incentives that prioritise short-term political gain but insurance is cheaper than catastrophe. I don't always agree with Taleb but he's right on this. How much death and economic damage would we have averted with some basic precautions?0 -
Of course the government will be eager to blame the civil service for this failure. On the other hand, the NRR and NRA are Cabinet Office responsibility. In January or February did Michael Give ever think to have a look in the NRR and see what it said about pandemics?barrypeanuts said:
That verbiage is not a good look.JonathanD said:barrypeanuts said:
To my mind, the only real question worth asking is why (especially after Exercise Cygnus) was the government so ill-prepared across the board for the outbreak of a novel disease?
What's astonishing is that a pandemic was top of the UK risk register - eg p9 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644968/UK_National_Risk_Register_2017.pdf - but while the government had all the theory mapped out, the implementation was woeful.
Fairly obvious that all government time over the last three years has been consumed with Brexit instead of dealing with the mundane reality of government.
Too much back patting like this instead.
"The United Kingdom has an enviable reputation for resilience. In a rapidly changing world, we are at the forefront of embracing new opportunities and seeking innovative solutions to emerging problems.
Resilience does not come easily but the UK has long experience. Call it what you will, but whether through the fabled ‘stiff upper lip’, ‘Blitz spirit’ or just a stubborn determination, our resilience can be seen at the forefront of our handling of emergencies. Within Government, this is based on robust risk management and tried and tested emergency response and recovery arrangements."
I agree with you, with the slight caveat that this particular PM came into office 6 months or so before the outbreak. The wider point of course is that this shouldn't matter, the government should have a base level of preparedness whatever and whoever is in the driving seat.
Ironically, the institutional failings of the civil service is very much Cummings bag. I would imagine that Covid will simply reinforce his view on this.
Defence of the nation is the PMs number one priority - do we think Johnson has ever even skim read the NRR?0 -
Quite possibly. I think the reasonable way to view excess mortality in the end will be for the entire year, eg 1/1/20 to 31/12/20 (assuming this doesn't drag into next year with high excess deaths).dodrade said:Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?
0 -
"Social distancing makes running the railways impossible
Christian Wolmar" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/social-distancing-makes-running-the-railways-impossible-xbsvj72xk0 -
Of course the government will be eager to blame the civil service for this failure. On the other hand, the NRR and NRA are Cabinet Office responsibility. In January or February did Michael Give ever think to have a look in the NRR and see what it said about pandemics?
Who knows? If your point is the Brexit was so all consuming at the heart of government that other stuff fell by the wayside you may be right.0 -
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?0 -
Why is my quoting so messed up? Three different formats on three different posts!
0 -
Yet still a 1.5% swing to the Tories since GE 2019 and Boris still preferred PM over StarmerTheScreamingEagles said:1 -
..0
-
And not just the virus directly . My Dad was an "Excess death". Not because of the virus, but because we chose to let him die comfortably at home.dodrade said:Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?
Because we didn't want him in hospital at risk of a nasty CV 19 death.
He would have been dead anyway by the end of the year. But probably not this month had he had all the treatment available with round the clock medical care.
Therefore he is an excess death for May.
But not for the year.
There must be many more. So, yes, I would expect excess deaths to go negative at some future point.0 -
Why are you comparing a home to a workplace? If people are discharged and can't go to your work where do you expect them to go instead? Stay at home?another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
If the care home is there home where do you propose they go instead? This isn't a trick question, the home is where they live where else should they go?
Care homes are used to infectious disease controls and barrier nursing. Perhaps an alternative like a halfway house between hospital and homes should be developed going forward but there was no decision to discharge people from hospital to homes. People get discharged from hospitals to homes every single day of the year.0 -
You're obviously new here...barrypeanuts said:Why is my quoting so messed up? Three different formats on three different posts!
Oh and welcome.1 -
Sorry for your loss.dixiedean said:
And not just the virus directly . My Dad was an "Excess death". Not because of the virus, but because we chose to let him die comfortably at home.dodrade said:Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?
Because we didn't want him in hospital at risk of a nasty CV 19 death.
He would have been dead anyway by the end of the year. But probably not this month had he had all the treatment available with round the clock medical care.
Therefore he is an excess death for May.
But not for the year.
There must be many more. So, yes, I would expect excess deaths to go negative at some future point.0 -
deleted0
-
Indeed. But even you can't deny the trend.HYUFD said:
Yet still a 1.5% swing to the Tories since GE 2019 and Boris still preferred PM over StarmerTheScreamingEagles said:
Whether it is a reversion to the mean or something more has yet to be determined.0 -
A care home is not just their home but the home of other vulnerable people.Philip_Thompson said:
Why are you comparing a home to a workplace? If people are discharged and can't go to your work where do you expect them to go instead? Stay at home?another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
If the care home is there home where do you propose they go instead? This isn't a trick question, the home is where they live where else should they go?
Care homes are used to infectious disease controls and barrier nursing. Perhaps an alternative like a halfway house between hospital and homes should be developed going forward but there was no decision to discharge people from hospital to homes. People get discharged from hospitals to homes every single day of the year.
And a care home is also a workplace for the people who work there.0 -
Well that is definitely the question. Seems it was policy until Mid April:another_richard said:
What policy was that ?
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/24/care-homes-ordered-take-patients-suspected-coronavirus-nhs-hospitals/0 -
There was a very specific decision to do precisely that. I’ve linked to the government document several times.Philip_Thompson said:
Why are you comparing a home to a workplace? If people are discharged and can't go to your work where do you expect them to go instead? Stay at home?another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
If the care home is there home where do you propose they go instead? This isn't a trick question, the home is where they live where else should they go?
Care homes are used to infectious disease controls and barrier nursing. Perhaps an alternative like a halfway house between hospital and homes should be developed going forward but there was no decision to discharge people from hospital to homes...
0 -
Any party poll rating above 50% is froth.dixiedean said:
Indeed. But even you can't deny the trend.HYUFD said:
Yet still a 1.5% swing to the Tories since GE 2019 and Boris still preferred PM over StarmerTheScreamingEagles said:
Whether it is a reversion to the mean or something more has yet to be determined.
Any party poll rating above 45% is probably froth.0 -
Did this work?dixiedean said:
You're obviously new here...
Oh and welcome.
Yep, signed up to blow off the steam of relief when Corbyn went down at the GE. Stayed for the Corona chat.
0 -
Yes it's all of the above.another_richard said:
A care home is not just their home but the home of other vulnerable people.Philip_Thompson said:
Why are you comparing a home to a workplace? If people are discharged and can't go to your work where do you expect them to go instead? Stay at home?another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
If the care home is there home where do you propose they go instead? This isn't a trick question, the home is where they live where else should they go?
Care homes are used to infectious disease controls and barrier nursing. Perhaps an alternative like a halfway house between hospital and homes should be developed going forward but there was no decision to discharge people from hospital to homes. People get discharged from hospitals to homes every single day of the year.
And a care home is also a workplace for the people who work there.
Now when people get discharged from hospital where do you propose they go?
Care homes can be sending people to hospitals and getting people back from hospitals on an almost daily basis. Should that become a one-way trip?
A home with a hundred elderly residents who were all too ill to live independently at home is going to have someone who needs to go to the hospital quite regularly. And unless they pass away in the hospital they'll be discharged just as regularly.0 -
Thanks for that. I have been expecting it for 6 months. And strangely, this virus made it somewhat easier.Philip_Thompson said:
Sorry for your loss.dixiedean said:
And not just the virus directly . My Dad was an "Excess death". Not because of the virus, but because we chose to let him die comfortably at home.dodrade said:Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?
Because we didn't want him in hospital at risk of a nasty CV 19 death.
He would have been dead anyway by the end of the year. But probably not this month had he had all the treatment available with round the clock medical care.
Therefore he is an excess death for May.
But not for the year.
There must be many more. So, yes, I would expect excess deaths to go negative at some future point.0 -
Do you have any statistics? I thought it was said the number of discharges had gone down not up.Nigelb said:
There was a very specific decision to do precisely that. I’ve linked to the government document several times.Philip_Thompson said:
Why are you comparing a home to a workplace? If people are discharged and can't go to your work where do you expect them to go instead? Stay at home?another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
If the care home is there home where do you propose they go instead? This isn't a trick question, the home is where they live where else should they go?
Care homes are used to infectious disease controls and barrier nursing. Perhaps an alternative like a halfway house between hospital and homes should be developed going forward but there was no decision to discharge people from hospital to homes...0 -
Hi guys, is anyone else finding the mobile site literally unusable right now? it literally serves me minimum 6 ads per article and when I go to post a comment it greys out the area so I can't post.
On topic: no, no with a 74 majority, Boris will not be out by xmas. Whether for good or for ill.0 -
GTR made 621hp on its last dyno and has had all of the airbags removed.Theuniondivvie said:
Dura Ace might be on for a short term chauffeuring contract. Whether that's more or less dangerous than a chopper I don't know..TheScreamingEagles said:
The Woodhead Pass and Snake Pass are a nightmare for cars for my commute.Black_Rook said:
Oh, OK. Chauffeur-driven Rolls Royce then. The roads are atypically quiet nowadays, after all.TheScreamingEagles said:
No, a helicopter pilot told me years ago that flying by helicopter really is dangerous, and when things even go slightly wrong they fall like a stone from the sky and there's bugger all you can do to stop it.Black_Rook said:
Helicopter?TheScreamingEagles said:
The worst news came for me this week, the train companies are getting rid of first class for the foreseeable future.FrancisUrquhart said:
Now remember when all the tech bros shut down early & saying work from home for at least the rest of the year (some forever). This again signals that smart people dont think there is a vaccine or this thing reducing to minimal levels anytime soon.TheScreamingEagles said:BREAKING: Cambridge confirms ‘no face-to-face lectures during the next academic year’
Lectures and exams will be conducted virtually
In an email sent to Senior Tutors today (19th May), it was announced that the University of Cambridge plans to move all “face-to-face lectures” online in the next academic year, 2020/21.
Alice Benton, the Head of Education services, states in the email that the “General Board’s Education Committee” has “agreed that, since it is highly likely that rigid social distancing will be required throughout the next academic year, there will be no face-to-face lectures next year.”
“The decision has been taken to provide a degree of certainty to facilitate Faculties and Departments when planning for educational delivery next academic year”.
Lectures will be live-streamed, recorded and made available on Moodle, while there are plans for lecture theatres to be used for small group teaching in line with social distancing requirements: “Faculties and Departments should continue to plan for face-to-face delivery of seminars, workshops and small group teaching”.
In reference to Michaelmas exams, Benton also notes that it is ‘highly unlikely these examinations will be able to take place in examination halls’. She suggests faculties adapt to this scenario accordingly.
https://thetab.com/uk/cambridge/2020/05/19/cambridge-confirms-no-face-to-face-lectures-during-the-next-academic-year-137712
How the feck am I supposed to get to work without a first class section?0 -
Re your earlier point, governance has been piss-poor in the UK for decades. It's getting worse, and is not going to get better. Sir Keir will do sod all to fix it.tyson said:
A quick tip.....I think even the bluest blue in 5 years time will be relieved that we have someone of Keir's competence and stature as PM after such a shocking period of government in the UK...
I am embarrassed by my Govt now in the UK....we are an international joke and laughing stock.
We're better off hoping for a benevolent artificial super intelligence to take over the running of the world.0 -
How about this for an idea: Boris Johnson takes a 6 month break from being PM, with Rishi Sunak taking over on an experimental basis. Johnson returns as PM, with Sunak having gained valuable experience of doing the top job.0
-
I think with something like this the government has to take responsibility. People making local operational decisions are often far too busy trying to cope with the everyday stuff to properly take this novel situation properly into account (until it's too late).another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?0 -
This thread has
resigned
0 -
Yes, the site is unusable to me on my phone.kyf_100 said:Hi guys, is anyone else finding the mobile site literally unusable right now? it literally serves me minimum 6 ads per article and when I go to post a comment it greys out the area so I can't post.
On topic: no, no with a 74 majority, Boris will not be out by xmas. Whether for good or for ill.1 -
From a zoomer, that's hilarious.Theuniondivvie said:I don't think getting a stauner over your fleg is evil, just a bit weird. Quite a lot weird actually, but whatever.
0 -
We are past seasonal flu.dodrade said:Re: Excess deaths, should we expect the mortality rate to go below average for a time once the outbreak is over as the virus has already claimed many of those who would otherwise have died in the near future of underlying conditions/seasonal flu?
0 -
No, the decisions are simple.kamski said:
I think with something like this the government has to take responsibility. People making local operational decisions are often far too busy trying to cope with the everyday stuff to properly take this novel situation properly into account (until it's too late).another_richard said:
What policy was that ?barrypeanuts said:
Neither obviously, but the policy came from somewhere.
Sure there will have been operational errors, I'm conceding that because making decisions under certainty with very high stakes is extremely tough. But I think there was enough evidence of how rough this virus is on the old and frail early on to invalidiate Hancock's claim of a 'ring of protection' around care homes.
Now I certainly think there was a lack of leadership and an inattention to detail on care homes from the government.
But that doesn't excuse the decisions taken at operational levels which includes those making the decision to discharge potentially risky people to care homes and those making the decision to allow potentially risky people into a care home.
I've said before that someone discharged from hospital would not be allowed to return to my workplace in such a manner so why were they allowed to return to care homes ?
Do you send a possibly infected person to a care home and do you accept possibly infected people into a care home ?
It seems there were people in both the NHS and care homes who thought the answer was Yes.
People have to make their own decisions and take responsibility.
The alternative is we get our lives micro managed by the government and they show no signs of being capable of doing that.1
