Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov on the Bristol statue downing and the Prince Andrew/Eps

SystemSystem Posts: 12,671
edited June 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov on the Bristol statue downing and the Prince Andrew/Epstein connection

politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    edited June 2020
    Polls find majority of public doesn't like mobs doing what they like.

    Did they (pollsters) get paid for this?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,816
    Pffffffffff.........
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,135
    Surely the Queen wont let her son end up in the US prison system? Not sure how it gets resolved?
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    So basically the upshot of these polls is that for maximum banter we should immediately erect a staue of Prince Andrew in Bristol without public consultation...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 32,553
    Considering the rather fruity atmosphere at the moment, I'm surprised as many as 33% said they didn't approve of the statue's removal at all. Especially if it was a phone poll.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    Has anyone got the latest sonar scan on Teddy Boy Colston. Is he still residing with the Brizzle fishes or has someone dredged him from the deep?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,847
    BluestBlue said:

    So basically the upshot of these polls is that for maximum banter we should immediately erect a staue of Prince Andrew in Bristol without public consultation...

    "It was a statue toppling party. A straightforward statue toppling party."
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,371
    BluestBlue said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    rcs1000 said:

    eadric said:

    rcs1000 said:

    contrarian said:

    Nigelb said:

    contrarian said:

    Andrew Neil has a bit of an interview with one of the Minneapolis city council members who are disbanding the police.

    Listen to her answer when CNN ask what people should so if someone breaks into their home and there are no police to call.

    That, apparently is a question that doesn't really need an answer, because it is a question that comes from a person's white privilege.

    https://world.wng.org/2018/03/camden_s_new_day
    From that interview, no reform is being planned. There simply won;t be any forces of law and order in Minneapolis.

    Simply to ask what the arrangements after the police are gone stems from white privilege. Sit there and take your murder, rape and looting and we'll tell you when we're good and ready.

    And now we can see what assigning 'white privilege' is in the minds of some.

    Come come.

    Do you really believe there will be no police force in Minneapolis?

    A number of times in the last fifty years, whole units of Police in the UK, have been disbanded. That didn't mean there stopped being police, it meant that there were new names, new people at the top, and often significant changes in the composition of the rank and file.
    You actually live in America, and you also don't understand the scale of this madness. Some of them mean literally what they say: give the job of policing to other agencies "better equipped" - social workers, psychotherapists, etc

    This is a classic phenomenon during these social convulsions. Utopian dreaming. The Putney Debates considered communism. In the late 70s there was a serious movement to legalise pedophilia
    With all due respect @eadric, you don't get the extent to which most Americans fear their police.

    I live in prosperous, white Los Angeles.

    Most of them have had - at some point - a bad experience with the police.

    Now, there are some people in the UK who have been accused of crimes, perhaps wrongly. But almost everyone I know in the UK *generally* has good experiences with the police. That's not true of the US.

    In any case, there's a bit of a jurisdictional thing here. There will be a Minneapolis Sheriff's Department that will be different from the the Minneapolis Police Department. Eliminating one (and really, we're not talking about throwing 1,000 people onto the street, we're talking about transferring most of them to a new organisation) is not the same as getting rid of all policing in Minneapolis.
    If that's true then why are we all having to suffer these crazed protests?
    Because everyone's been locked up for ages, and there's a punch of pent up frustration.

    And a lot of US police forces have been out of control, particularly as regards minorities.

    Here's my stat for the day. Since 1870, according to Wikipedia, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.

    In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. Now, criminals have guns in the US. So, you'd expect a disparity. But 5x as many deaths in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK is an insane disparity.
    An astounding statistic. It does also highlight why the direct transplantation of BLM, kneeling, 'Don't Shoot!', etc etc from the US to the UK and elsewhere, as if all our societies had the same contexts and were equally troubled, rubs even some fair-minded people the wrong way.
    I completely agree.

    While the UK has many problems, importing BLM makes no sense.

    I suspect that - when the dust settles - a small network of Twitter bots will have been responsible for getting lots of people riled up in the UK, and will have created the illusion of a groundswell in support... that led to lots of people jumping on the bandwagon.
  • brokenwheelbrokenwheel Posts: 3,352
    Seems like Andrew has been talking to the Germans too...

    https://twitter.com/christiancalgie/status/1270106081969213444
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    rottenborough said:

    williamglenn said:

    Afraid of burglary? Check your privilege.

    https://twitter.com/eddiezipperer/status/1269951088964370432?s=21

    If you have anything worth nicking you are privileged.
    The only thing I have worth taking is my pride.
    BluestBlue said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    rcs1000 said:

    eadric said:

    rcs1000 said:

    contrarian said:

    Nigelb said:

    contrarian said:

    Andrew Neil has a bit of an interview with one of the Minneapolis city council members who are disbanding the police.

    Listen to her answer when CNN ask what people should so if someone breaks into their home and there are no police to call.

    That, apparently is a question that doesn't really need an answer, because it is a question that comes from a person's white privilege.

    https://world.wng.org/2018/03/camden_s_new_day
    From that interview, no reform is being planned. There simply won;t be any forces of law and order in Minneapolis.

    Simply to ask what the arrangements after the police are gone stems from white privilege. Sit there and take your murder, rape and looting and we'll tell you when we're good and ready.

    And now we can see what assigning 'white privilege' is in the minds of some.

    Come come.

    Do you really believe there will be no police force in Minneapolis?

    A number of times in the last fifty years, whole units of Police in the UK, have been disbanded. That didn't mean there stopped being police, it meant that there were new names, new people at the top, and often significant changes in the composition of the rank and file.
    You actually live in America, and you also don't understand the scale of this madness. Some of them mean literally what they say: give the job of policing to other agencies "better equipped" - social workers, psychotherapists, etc

    This is a classic phenomenon during these social convulsions. Utopian dreaming. The Putney Debates considered communism. In the late 70s there was a serious movement to legalise pedophilia
    With all due respect @eadric, you don't get the extent to which most Americans fear their police.

    I live in prosperous, white Los Angeles.

    Most of them have had - at some point - a bad experience with the police.

    Now, there are some people in the UK who have been accused of crimes, perhaps wrongly. But almost everyone I know in the UK *generally* has good experiences with the police. That's not true of the US.

    In any case, there's a bit of a jurisdictional thing here. There will be a Minneapolis Sheriff's Department that will be different from the the Minneapolis Police Department. Eliminating one (and really, we're not talking about throwing 1,000 people onto the street, we're talking about transferring most of them to a new organisation) is not the same as getting rid of all policing in Minneapolis.
    If that's true then why are we all having to suffer these crazed protests?
    Because everyone's been locked up for ages, and there's a punch of pent up frustration.

    And a lot of US police forces have been out of control, particularly as regards minorities.

    Here's my stat for the day. Since 1870, according to Wikipedia, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.

    In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. Now, criminals have guns in the US. So, you'd expect a disparity. But 5x as many deaths in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK is an insane disparity.
    An astounding statistic. It does also highlight why the direct transplantation of BLM, kneeling, 'Don't Shoot!', etc etc from the US to the UK and elsewhere, as if all our societies had the same contexts and were equally troubled, rubs even some fair-minded people the wrong way.
    Exactly this. There is talking about UK specifics, which is good, but that direct transplantation in pursuit of a global movement, does not quite work. In itself it is not a bad idea, but adjusts for local circumstances needs to be played up more otherwise it is too easy to dismiss since there's always someplace worse, and it's usually the USA. And from experience on here, saying that leads directly to accusations of being a racist, remarkably.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,395
    edited June 2020
    "New York Magazine faces backlash for 'banning' conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan from writing about anti-racism riots - or face the sack

    Andrew Sullivan announced on Thursday that the latest installment of his column in New York Magazine would not be running this week
    Cockburn, a blog run by UK-based news outlet The Spectator, alleged that New York Magazine would not allow Sullivan to write about the riots
    'Presumably Sullivan's editors are frightened that he might make the radically bourgeois point that looting and violence are wrong,' a Cockburn blog post says
    Sullivan's Twitter account is studded with criticisms of recent protests sparked by the death of George Floyd
    News that his column won't run was met with mixed reactions on Twitter"

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396935/New-York-magazine-faces-backlash-banning-conservative-columnist-writing-riots.html
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    Better hope Her Maj throws her weight behind BLM before the unreformed US Police get their hands on Andy.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    I believe tomorrow we move to Oxford and protests about the Rhodes statue again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    edited June 2020
    rcs1000 said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    rcs1000 said:

    eadric said:

    rcs1000 said:

    contrarian said:

    Nigelb said:

    contrarian said:

    Andrew Neil has a bit of an interview with one of the Minneapolis city council members who are disbanding the police.

    Listen to her answer when CNN ask what people should so if someone breaks into their home and there are no police to call.

    That, apparently is a question that doesn't really need an answer, because it is a question that comes from a person's white privilege.

    https://world.wng.org/2018/03/camden_s_new_day
    From that interview, no reform is being planned. There simply won;t be any forces of law and order in Minneapolis.

    Simply to ask what the arrangements after the police are gone stems from white privilege. Sit there and take your murder, rape and looting and we'll tell you when we're good and ready.

    And now we can see what assigning 'white privilege' is in the minds of some.

    Come come.

    Do you really believe there will be no police force in Minneapolis?

    A number of times in the last fifty years, whole units of Police in the UK, have been disbanded. That didn't mean there stopped being police, it meant that there were new names, new people at the top, and often significant changes in the composition of the rank and file.
    You actually live in America, and you also don't understand the scale of this madness. Some of them mean literally what they say: give the job of policing to other agencies "better equipped" - social workers, psychotherapists, etc

    This is a classic phenomenon during these social convulsions. Utopian dreaming. The Putney Debates considered communism. In the late 70s there was a serious movement to legalise pedophilia
    With all due respect @eadric, you don't get the extent to which most Americans fear their police.

    I live in prosperous, white Los Angeles.

    Most of them have had - at some point - a bad experience with the police.

    Now, there are some people in the UK who have been accused of crimes, perhaps wrongly. But almost everyone I know in the UK *generally* has good experiences with the police. That's not true of the US.

    In any case, there's a bit of a jurisdictional thing here. There will be a Minneapolis Sheriff's Department that will be different from the the Minneapolis Police Department. Eliminating one (and really, we're not talking about throwing 1,000 people onto the street, we're talking about transferring most of them to a new organisation) is not the same as getting rid of all policing in Minneapolis.
    If that's true then why are we all having to suffer these crazed protests?
    Because everyone's been locked up for ages, and there's a punch of pent up frustration.

    And a lot of US police forces have been out of control, particularly as regards minorities.

    Here's my stat for the day. Since 1870, according to Wikipedia, police forces in Great Britain have killed 220 people. Three of them were in 2019, and one in 2018.

    In the US, in 2019, 1,098 people were killed by police. Now, criminals have guns in the US. So, you'd expect a disparity. But 5x as many deaths in 2019 as in the last 150 years in the UK is an insane disparity.
    A stat that's simultaneously very depressing and heartening, depending on location.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    dixiedean said:

    Better hope Her Maj throws her weight behind BLM before the unreformed US Police get their hands on Andy.

    I believe she is preparing yet another recorded statement to the nation where she will take a knee.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    edited June 2020
    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    In the UK, only a very small number of criminals have weapons, and the really serious ones the authorities have some idea about already. And of course, we only have specialist units with firearms. It is a lot easier for the police not to end up shooting people, if a) the people don't have them and b) the police don't either.

    Where as in the US, I imagine in many scenarios the police presume a criminal has a weapon, and often a firearm, and it escalates from there.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 130,127
    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    edited June 2020
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    The american generally non crime committing public seem impervious to being convinced it's ok to have a reduced gun society (at least in amounts large enough to see that happen) - perhaps instead efforts should be made to convince american criminals that you can have lots of crime without guns too? Still leaves knives, but you cannot have everything.

    Or go full Shogun on this and take away weapons from all the peasants.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Interesting thread on Police Demo control tactics:

    https://twitter.com/mikerstephens/status/1269933306465923073?s=21
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    FPT

    I notice some posters having a bit of fun speculating who might replace Trump if he jumped (or got pushed).

    In the unlikely event of such a happening. one cannot rule out Pence who in republican terms has loyalty to Trump but has managed to keep separation via doing not very much.

    I also should point out, again, that group of republicans opposed to Trump back in 2016 asked a bloke called Jim Mattis to run against Trump. He didn't bite and they ended up with ex-CIA officer Evin McMullin.

    Here's the problem the GOP have, there are a few good choices right now. Trump would have to go of his own accord (with a pardon as a deal) . Any sign of a push and you risk causing ructions with the ultra-Trumps, in the hope of winning the types who backed him in 2016 but are notably shifting away in 2020. Go with a continuity but less controversial candidate you probably will lose anyway, go with a sweep away of the the Trump approach, you lose ultra Trumpers

    Result, Trump is maybe the best you have in 2020 in that he can motivate the core, is likely to get beaten in 2020, you let the voters kick him out rather than have a putsch, then you rebuild after a 'period of reflection'. As well as that you avoid having to address a possible pardon for at least 4 years when, as a private citizen, the law starts to go after him.


  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    An interesting question would have been how many want the statue dredged up, cleaned off and replaced?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    edited June 2020
    kle4 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    The american generally non crime committing public seem impervious to being convinced it's ok to have a reduced gun society (at least in amounts large enough to see that happen) - perhaps instead efforts should be made to convince american criminals that you can have lots of crime without guns too? Still leaves knives, but you cannot have everything.

    Or go full Shogun on this and take away weapons from all the peasants.
    And of course, when shit starts to hit the fan, the evidence shows there is always an uptake in law abiding citizens purchasing weapons.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,395
    edited June 2020
    Why didn't the Labour government from 1997 to 2010 take down these statutes? Probably because they had more important things to do, like running the country.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    kle4 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    The american generally non crime committing public seem impervious to being convinced it's ok to have a reduced gun society (at least in amounts large enough to see that happen) - perhaps instead efforts should be made to convince american criminals that you can have lots of crime without guns too? Still leaves knives, but you cannot have everything.

    Or go full Shogun on this and take away weapons from all the peasants.
    Plenty of Americans seem to exist perfectly well without weapons in the house.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    dixiedean said:

    kle4 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    The american generally non crime committing public seem impervious to being convinced it's ok to have a reduced gun society (at least in amounts large enough to see that happen) - perhaps instead efforts should be made to convince american criminals that you can have lots of crime without guns too? Still leaves knives, but you cannot have everything.

    Or go full Shogun on this and take away weapons from all the peasants.
    Plenty of Americans seem to exist perfectly well without weapons in the house.
    Hence the parantheses - there are loads of americans who don't wish to have guns, but not enough as a whole to also see reduction in guns in society, since that would need to be forced on those who love their guns more than their spouses.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    dixiedean said:

    An interesting question would have been how many want the statue dredged up, cleaned off and replaced?

    I doubt Ted will be returning to his pedestal. Perhaps some enterprising fella will arrange viewings from a glass-bottomed submarine?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,282
    edited June 2020
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    I believe tomorrow we move to Oxford and protests about the Rhodes statue again.

    Oriel won't be keen on taking it down. Not when an anonymous benefactor to the tune of £100m or so threatens to withdraw their money...
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    HYUFD said:

    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully

    Removing it lawfully might be slightly tricky now - unless you are advocating dredging it, screwing it back in, then asking Bristol Council waste dept to fling it in the back of a truck?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,068
    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    Anabobazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully

    Removing it lawfully might be slightly tricky now - unless you are advocating dredging it, screwing it back in, then asking Bristol Council waste dept to fling it in the back of a truck?
    Nah, just treat it like retrospective planning permission, where in theory if they vote not to remove it they would have to put it back, but since they will now probably vote to remove it, all is well.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,371
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    In the UK, only a very small number of criminals have weapons, and the really serious ones the authorities have some idea about already. And of course, we only have specialist units with firearms. It is a lot easier for the police not to end up shooting people, if a) the people don't have them and b) the police don't either.

    Where as in the US, I imagine in many scenarios the police presume a criminal has a weapon, and often a firearm, and it escalates from there.

    This is an excellent article on that very issue: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/07/the-spy-who-came-home
  • isamisam Posts: 42,539
    Couple of weeks ago the Spotify in my car wouldn't work so I pressed play on the cd and it was Tracy Chapmans first album. I don't drive much and hadn't changed the cd probably for a year. Struck me this week that she must be amazed by how little has changed in the 30 odd years since she made it.

    Quite a relevant album in the current climate, worth a listen if you've not heard it.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
    You’d dredge him up?

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,776
    Latest US polls uniformly bleak for Trump - the jobs data and the riots seem to have made no difference.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    isam said:

    Couple of weeks ago the Spotify in my car wouldn't work so I pressed play on the cd and it was Tracy Chapmans first album. I don't drive much and hadn't changed the cd probably for a year. Struck me this week that she must be amazed by how little has changed in the 30 odd years since she made it.

    Quite a relevant album in the current climate, worth a listen if you've not heard it.

    Yep. One of the best.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,539
    Andy_JS said:

    Why didn't the Labour government from 1997 to 2010 take down these statutes? Probably because they had more important things to do, like running the country.

    I just don't think it achieves anything much because nobody much cared about the statue anyway, if they'd heard of it before now, and any awareness raised by its toppling is offset by anger at the violence and lockdown breakage.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,068
    Anabobazina said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
    You’d dredge him up?

    ...history should never be airbrushed away. It should be available and contextualised for all to see.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    kle4 said:

    Anabobazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully

    Removing it lawfully might be slightly tricky now - unless you are advocating dredging it, screwing it back in, then asking Bristol Council waste dept to fling it in the back of a truck?
    Nah, just treat it like retrospective planning permission, where in theory if they vote not to remove it they would have to put it back, but since they will now probably vote to remove it, all is well.
    I can see the press release now.

    Bristol City Council condemns the acts of the vandals. However, on reflection, we have decided that the sea bed is a better place for Ted Colston than his original plinth. Sub aquatic planning permission is hereby granted retrospectively.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    The commonly touted stat is that there are more legally held privately owned weapons in the US than citizens. This fails to account for the gun nut for whom multiple weapons are standard.

    In actual reality probably a third of US citizens directly own a legally held weapon or weapons. Some surveys suggest Switzerland may be as high as 20% then there is Israel, where there is a tremendous amount of officially sanctioned firearms in citizen hands but truly private ownership is actually very very tightly controlled.

    The difference is the attitude, the latter two countries operate within a system where oversight and control is expected and they accept the states authority. The US, however, has a significant population of gun owners who think the state is an enemy or at least deeply suspect and having a cabinet full of weaponry is part of the checks and balances against an over-reaching government.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    Anabobazina said:

    kle4 said:

    Anabobazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully

    Removing it lawfully might be slightly tricky now - unless you are advocating dredging it, screwing it back in, then asking Bristol Council waste dept to fling it in the back of a truck?
    Nah, just treat it like retrospective planning permission, where in theory if they vote not to remove it they would have to put it back, but since they will now probably vote to remove it, all is well.
    I can see the press release now.

    Bristol City Council condemns the acts of the vandals. However, on reflection, we have decided that the sea bed is a better place for Ted Colston than his original plinth. Sub aquatic planning permission is hereby granted retrospectively.
    Its just ridiculous enough to be plausible.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
    You’d dredge him up?

    ...history should never be airbrushed away. It should be available and contextualised for all to see.
    The best way to contextualise it would be with an underground museum in the harbour, with a glass observation tunnel so it can be viewed in its resting place.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    It is indeed. If you have no symptoms, and can't transmit, in what sense do you "have" the virus at all?
    It is almost a metaphysical question.
    Quite apart from the fact that it causes multiple organ failures in others of similar status.
    As a 50+ male of A+ blood group it is all a bit eerily random.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    ...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    NickPalmer said:

    Latest US polls uniformly bleak for Trump - the jobs data and the riots seem to have made no difference.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

    Theyve got worse.
    35 million unemployed. A virus not under any kind of control. And massive protests and disorder on the streets.
    It's amazing he polls so highly.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,371
    Yokes said:

    The commonly touted stat is that there are more legally held privately owned weapons in the US than citizens. This fails to account for the gun nut for whom multiple weapons are standard.

    In actual reality probably a third of US citizens directly own a legally held weapon or weapons. Some surveys suggest Switzerland may be as high as 20% then there is Israel, where there is a tremendous amount of officially sanctioned firearms in citizen hands but truly private ownership is actually very very tightly controlled.

    The difference is the attitude, the latter two countries operate within a system where oversight and control is expected and they accept the states authority. The US, however, has a significant population of gun owners who think the state is an enemy or at least deeply suspect and having a cabinet full of weaponry is part of the checks and balances against an over-reaching government.

    The Swiss numbers are somewhat misleading though. If you are part of the reserve - and most Swiss men between 20 and 45 are - then you are required to keep your army rifle at home.

    But... you don't get ammunition. You have a weapon you are responsible for, but cannot fire.

    What's the number for Swiss citizens with guns *and* ammunition?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    dixiedean said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    It is indeed. If you have no symptoms, and can't transmit, in what sense do you "have" the virus at all?
    It is almost a metaphysical question.
    Quite apart from the fact that it causes multiple organ failures in others of similar status.
    As a 50+ male of A+ blood group it is all a bit eerily random.
    If you don’t have any pre-existing conditions, it’s a low risk to you though. The NHS England showed that 90%+ of all deaths were with pre-existing conditions.

    I had no idea it was anything like that high.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    edited June 2020
    rcs1000 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    In the UK, only a very small number of criminals have weapons, and the really serious ones the authorities have some idea about already. And of course, we only have specialist units with firearms. It is a lot easier for the police not to end up shooting people, if a) the people don't have them and b) the police don't either.

    Where as in the US, I imagine in many scenarios the police presume a criminal has a weapon, and often a firearm, and it escalates from there.

    This is an excellent article on that very issue: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/07/the-spy-who-came-home
    "For the Savannah police, the biggest obstacle in gaining the community’s trust is the city’s history. Savannah is around fifty-five per cent black, and Georgia practiced segregation well into the second half of the twentieth century;"

    I had a fascinating (if you can call it that) experience there a few years ago. Something I never experienced anywhere but the deep South.

    There was an evening of Zydeco music down by the waterfront. They had setup a whole long wooden benches and myself and Mrs U took our drinks and wandered through the crowd attention focused upon finding a free spot. We located one and sat ourselves down on the end of one and started to watch the band on stage.

    After the band finished for a break, I turned to talk to other people on the bench, having never seen Zydeco music before and wanting to ask more about it, and they turned away from us. At that point I started to look around the crowd and realized that the crowd had voluntarily segregated themselves between black and white exactly down the middle of the park....and Mrs U and I were sat in the black area. And many people in the white area were staring at us.

    Interestingly when the family on the table heard myself and Mrs U talk to one another and realised we weren't from the US, we got the usual question of where in Australia are we from. After obviously correcting them, we had a very pleasant evening being educated about Zydeco music from this family.

    The irony of it all, the band were a mix of white and black folk.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    Anabobazina said:

    dixiedean said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    It is indeed. If you have no symptoms, and can't transmit, in what sense do you "have" the virus at all?
    It is almost a metaphysical question.
    Quite apart from the fact that it causes multiple organ failures in others of similar status.
    As a 50+ male of A+ blood group it is all a bit eerily random.
    If you don’t have any pre-existing conditions, it’s a low risk to you though. The NHS England showed that 90%+ of all deaths were with pre-existing conditions.

    I had no idea it was anything like that high.
    I hear you and get you.
    Don't fancy it though.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,539
    https://twitter.com/contelnews/status/1269696019664683016?s=21
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    Anabobazina said:

    kle4 said:

    Anabobazina said:

    HYUFD said:

    So most Leavers want the Colston statue to stay in place even if most of the country want it to be removed but lawfully

    Removing it lawfully might be slightly tricky now - unless you are advocating dredging it, screwing it back in, then asking Bristol Council waste dept to fling it in the back of a truck?
    Nah, just treat it like retrospective planning permission, where in theory if they vote not to remove it they would have to put it back, but since they will now probably vote to remove it, all is well.
    I can see the press release now.

    Bristol City Council condemns the acts of the vandals. However, on reflection, we have decided that the sea bed is a better place for Ted Colston than his original plinth. Sub aquatic planning permission is hereby granted retrospectively.
    Given what happened to some of his human cargoes, that might not be entirely inappropriate.

    Suggestions along those lines here:
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/let-confederate-monuments-go-seed/612817/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    Anabobazina said:

    dixiedean said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    It is indeed. If you have no symptoms, and can't transmit, in what sense do you "have" the virus at all?
    It is almost a metaphysical question.
    Quite apart from the fact that it causes multiple organ failures in others of similar status.
    As a 50+ male of A+ blood group it is all a bit eerily random.
    If you don’t have any pre-existing conditions, it’s a low risk to you though. The NHS England showed that 90%+ of all deaths were with pre-existing conditions.

    I had no idea it was anything like that high.
    A pretty large percentage of the population have pre-existing conditions of one kind or another, though.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    edited June 2020
    NickPalmer said:

    Latest US polls uniformly bleak for Trump - the jobs data and the riots seem to have made no difference.

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

    Short of rigging it or Biden being a child murderer he is finished, his base is a rock solid 42-43% and there are few signs he can break upwards much beyond that. The biggest risk to the Democrats is a 3rd party candidate who can skim some off the froth of the Democrat vote and bring Biden's vote down. Key constituencies that make up the 3-4% that get you over the line have been drifting from Trump for well over a year . They either won't turn out or they will switch.

    Unless something comes from out of the sky about him, Biden is a good candidate versus Trump. He is a pretty straight talking no-nonsense guy, has a generally positive and sunny disposition, doesn't come across as elitist and isn't all rhetoric and unrealistic radicalism. He won't frighten the horses. It amazes me how people didn't get this throughout the primary. He doesn't have to talk high fallutin talk, he doesn't have to be inspired, he just needs to be solid through to November.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    isam said:

    https://twitter.com/contelnews/status/1269696019664683016?s=21

    Except it wasn't. Most Egyptologists recognise now it was built by professional, skilled labour.
    Stuff built by slavery tends not to last very long. See secret Nazi wonder weapons and the Confederacy.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,539
    The number of deaths in the UK from Covid-19, with no pre existing conditions, up to June 2nd...


  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    rcs1000 said:

    Yokes said:

    The commonly touted stat is that there are more legally held privately owned weapons in the US than citizens. This fails to account for the gun nut for whom multiple weapons are standard.

    In actual reality probably a third of US citizens directly own a legally held weapon or weapons. Some surveys suggest Switzerland may be as high as 20% then there is Israel, where there is a tremendous amount of officially sanctioned firearms in citizen hands but truly private ownership is actually very very tightly controlled.

    The difference is the attitude, the latter two countries operate within a system where oversight and control is expected and they accept the states authority. The US, however, has a significant population of gun owners who think the state is an enemy or at least deeply suspect and having a cabinet full of weaponry is part of the checks and balances against an over-reaching government.

    The Swiss numbers are somewhat misleading though. If you are part of the reserve - and most Swiss men between 20 and 45 are - then you are required to keep your army rifle at home.

    But... you don't get ammunition. You have a weapon you are responsible for, but cannot fire.

    What's the number for Swiss citizens with guns *and* ammunition?
    I'm talking about privately owned. There is no firm stats but some surveys suggest its that high
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    A better question on covid with no pre-existing conditions, how many have suffered life altering damage. Its all well.and good saying only a few 30-40 year old have died, but if 1000s have liver, kidney, heart, lung damage, thats not a good result.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    isam said:

    The number of deaths in the UK from Covid-19, with no pre existing conditions, up to June 2nd...


    Yes, that’s the data I was referring to. Thanks for the link.

    1,318 people in the UK have died from coronavirus without any pre-existing conditions, in total.

    I wasn’t aware the figure was anything like that low, I must admit. Were most people aware?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    Anabobazina said:

    isam said:

    The number of deaths in the UK from Covid-19, with no pre existing conditions, up to June 2nd...


    Yes, that’s the data I was referring to. Thanks for the link.

    1,318 people in the UK have died from coronavirus without any pre-existing conditions, in total.

    I wasn’t aware the figure was anything like that low, I must admit. Were most people aware?
    Sorry England, not UK. Couldn’t edit post for some reason.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    A better question on covid with no pre-existing conditions, how many have suffered life altering damage. Its all well.and good saying only a few 30-40 year old have died, but if 1000s have liver, kidney, heart, lung damage, thats not a good result.

    Sure, agreed. Not sure if that data exists?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,796
    Mexicanpete said:

    williamglenn said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
    You’d dredge him up?

    ...history should never be airbrushed away. It should be available and contextualised for all to see.
    The best way to contextualise it would be with an underground museum in the harbour, with a glass observation tunnel so it can be viewed in its resting place.
    Irrespective of Edward Colston's unsavoury past his statue had a value and it belonged, I believe, to the ratepayers of Bristol. It was wantonly vandalised by a criminal gang. The criminals involved, in addition to a lengthy custodial sentence should be made to pay for repairs. If the City of Bristol feels the need to sell it or use in a museum, so be it.
    Do we normally chuck people in prison for a long stretch for vandalism?
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,417
    So are we saying that we just had a lot of fat and/or otherwise unhealthy people die from Covid?

    Is that the summary?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 30,593
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    A better question on covid with no pre-existing conditions, how many have suffered life altering damage. Its all well.and good saying only a few 30-40 year old have died, but if 1000s have liver, kidney, heart, lung damage, thats not a good result.

    I don't fancy taking my chances. However, since I could have had it without knowing and not passed it on...
    It is this level of uncertainty which disturbs people. And is a huge barrier to the economy.
    I mean I've had flu. Real flu which puts you out of any kind of action for a fortnight. And pneumonia and pleurisy together, which is a whole other level. But I know it isn't fatal to me. Or gonna have lifelong effects.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,371
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    The ~1000 a year killed by the US police, of which only 10s were unarmed. Last year, 10 black and 20 white individuals (i dont know for latino). In the cases of black individuals, 5 were attacking an officer, 1 the officers gun went off accidentally (was a black officer) and 2 cases the officer who shot was charged.

    By armed, they can mean knives as well as guns.

    On top of the race issue, the core underlying problem is too many people have weapons. The public have weapons, so the criminals have weapons, so the police have weapons, so police end up shooting people who have weapons.

    In the UK, only a very small number of criminals have weapons, and the really serious ones the authorities have some idea about already. And of course, we only have specialist units with firearms. It is a lot easier for the police not to end up shooting people, if a) the people don't have them and b) the police don't either.

    Where as in the US, I imagine in many scenarios the police presume a criminal has a weapon, and often a firearm, and it escalates from there.

    This is an excellent article on that very issue: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/07/the-spy-who-came-home
    "For the Savannah police, the biggest obstacle in gaining the community’s trust is the city’s history. Savannah is around fifty-five per cent black, and Georgia practiced segregation well into the second half of the twentieth century;"

    I had a fascinating (if you can call it that) experience there a few years ago. Something I never experienced anywhere but the deep South.

    There was an evening of Zydeco music down by the waterfront. They had setup a whole long wooden benches and myself and Mrs U took our drinks and wandered through the crowd attention focused upon finding a free spot. We located one and sat ourselves down on the end of one and started to watch the band on stage.

    After the band finished for a break, I turned to talk to other people on the bench, having never seen Zydeco music before and wanting to ask more about it, and they turned away from us. At that point I started to look around the crowd and realized that the crowd had voluntarily segregated themselves between black and white exactly down the middle of the park....and Mrs U and I were sat in the black area. And many people in the white area were staring at us.

    Interestingly when the family on the table heard myself and Mrs U talk to one another and realised we weren't from the US, we got the usual question of where in Australia are we from. After obviously correcting them, we had a very pleasant evening being educated about Zydeco music from this family.

    The irony of it all, the band were a mix of white and black folk.
    That's the South.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 34,068
    Anabobazina said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    williamglenn said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Mexicanpete said:

    Anabobazina said:

    Should Eddy Colston...

    Remain in the Bristol Channel

    Leave the Bristol Channel

    I guess I must now be a Leaver then.
    You’d dredge him up?

    ...history should never be airbrushed away. It should be available and contextualised for all to see.
    The best way to contextualise it would be with an underground museum in the harbour, with a glass observation tunnel so it can be viewed in its resting place.
    Irrespective of Edward Colston's unsavoury past his statue had a value and it belonged, I believe, to the ratepayers of Bristol. It was wantonly vandalised by a criminal gang. The criminals involved, in addition to a lengthy custodial sentence should be made to pay for repairs. If the City of Bristol feels the need to sell it or use in a museum, so be it.
    Do we normally chuck people in prison for a long stretch for vandalism?
    Wasn't it six months for vandalising the Mrs Thatch' statue. Some might suggest a life sentence would have been appropriate.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 37,395
    https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1270070583779262469
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,371
    Andy_JS said:

    https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1270070583779262469

    I think that works for schools, but I'm less convinced it's *that* helpful for sporting events and choirs. The reality is that many people who have CV-19 probably think they have a bit of a cold.
  • houndtanghoundtang Posts: 450
    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,399
    https://twitter.com/CrimeLdn/status/1270130309640720388?s=19
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,761
    Andy_JS said:

    https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1270070583779262469

    Most of the media reporting on science issues is terrible, and WHO communication is also terrible.

    Reuters has a more careful take:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-asymptomatic-expla-idUSKBN23A21S

    The key point is that they think people who *never* develop symptoms probably don't spread the virus much, but people who haven't *yet* developed noticeable symptoms do. From the point of view of someone deciding whether they might infect people if they go and sing in a church, this isn't a useful distinction, because you don't know whether you're uninfected, asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic.

    I guess it might have implications for schools, since kids don't often seem to get symptoms.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,761
    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    This really isn't true. There may or may not be much difference between *extreme* lockdowns and less drastic measures like avoiding indoor events, but at this point I don't think you can reasonably doubt the effectiveness of less drastic measures, *taken early*.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    What happened to the edit function ?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Nigelb said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?

    He’s going to say Sweden, but you and I know that’s not true
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    edmundintokyo said:

    Andy_JS said:

    https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1270070583779262469

    Most of the media reporting on science issues is terrible, and WHO communication is also terrible.

    Reuters has a more careful take:
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-asymptomatic-expla-idUSKBN23A21S

    The key point is that they think people who *never* develop symptoms probably don't spread the virus much, but people who haven't *yet* developed noticeable symptoms do. From the point of view of someone deciding whether they might infect people if they go and sing in a church, this isn't a useful distinction, because you don't know whether you're uninfected, asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic.

    I guess it might have implications for schools, since kids don't often seem to get symptoms.
    Yes, it’s been pretty awful.
    Note the correction in the first story:
    Correction: An earlier headline should have said most asymptomatic coronavirus patients aren’t spreading new infections. The word “most” was inadvertedly omitted....

    (The misspelling of inadvertently is theirs.)
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,989
    https://twitter.com/ColinKahl/status/1270175759110246401
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    edmundintokyo said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    This really isn't true. There may or may not be much difference between *extreme* lockdowns and less drastic measures like avoiding indoor events, but at this point I don't think you can reasonably doubt the effectiveness of less drastic measures, *taken early*.
    There’s a thread here:

    https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1270139042160693248

    Bottom line; the WHO statement was highly misleading.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    https://twitter.com/nataliexdean/status/1270118956427345920
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    https://twitter.com/jeremyfaust/status/1270106180900106241

    https://twitter.com/jeremyfaust/status/1270106183555153920

    https://twitter.com/jeremyfaust/status/1270106192195403777
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    New York’s lockdown certainly appeared to work.

    https://twitter.com/Craig_A_Spencer/status/1270173868150358020

    https://twitter.com/BannerHealth/status/1270094394570321921
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    https://twitter.com/CBR/status/1269810380810977285
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Nigelb said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?
    All I'd say about the three million claim is that it comes from a group at Imperial College using their model to justify the use of their model.

    Like all of the epidemiological models of this illness - and the Imperial model appears to be the one most argued over - it represents a guess and may very well be wrong. Others have suggested, with some apparent evidence to back them up, that the voluntary social segregation practiced by the public prior to lockdown had already started to suppress the virus: the peak of Covid deaths seems to have happened too soon after the date of formal lockdown for the subsequent downward trend to be attributable to that decision - in other words, that the formal lockdown was both excessive and unnecessary.

    If that's true then you could still draw the conclusion that the level of mass casualties predicted by the Imperial model might have occurred had the behaviour of the population continued *exactly* as normal, but even that is disputable. If any of the theories regarding naturally occurring resistance in the population, or full or partial immunity conferred by previous infection with other coronaviruses, transpire to be correct then both the lethality of the virus to the average patient and its ability to spread through the population as a whole may have been greatly overestimated.

    When the inevitable enquiries into the handling of the pandemic take place then I expect a major bone of contention to be whether the use of a whole population lockdown to deal with it was like the sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut: an excessively blunt instrument which will end up causing more harm than good, because of the scale and effect of the economic damage that it has caused. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, of course, but it may very well turn out that a combination of targeted measures taken more quickly - proper defence of the care homes, segregated hospitals for Covid patients, self-isolation for the medically vulnerable but perhaps only a ban on mass gatherings and some degree of face covering use for everyone else, and an order to work from home where possible - might have done a better job of preserving life without shuttering whole sectors of the economy and precipitating mass unemployment.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,881
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Dean, was it not designed by skill labourers, but the heavy lifting/rolling done by slave labour?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 35,665
    Nigelb said:

    edmundintokyo said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    This really isn't true. There may or may not be much difference between *extreme* lockdowns and less drastic measures like avoiding indoor events, but at this point I don't think you can reasonably doubt the effectiveness of less drastic measures, *taken early*.
    There’s a thread here:

    https://twitter.com/ASlavitt/status/1270139042160693248

    Bottom line; the WHO statement was highly misleading.
    One cannot say that the WHO has had a good crisis. Even allowing for Trump's insanity.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    Another thread on the economic effects on US hospitals.
    Bottom line - without more government help than is currently being provided, the less financially secure ones are going to start going bust.

    https://twitter.com/Bob_Wachter/status/1270190625267146752
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,371
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Dean, was it not designed by skill labourers, but the heavy lifting/rolling done by slave labour?

    Even if it wasnt the guys it was built for presumably had tons of slaves, ruling a slave owning society.

    Let's year zero everything.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 29,687
    Under most important news of the day, I see that the Academie Francaise has declared COVID-19 to be Feminine.

    Ai, Caramba!

    Over here presumably the Fawcett Soiety would have a go at them for hate speech therefore.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,545
    Black_Rook said:

    Nigelb said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?
    All I'd say about the three million claim is that it comes from a group at Imperial College using their model to justify the use of their model.

    Like all of the epidemiological models of this illness - and the Imperial model appears to be the one most argued over - it represents a guess and may very well be wrong. Others have suggested, with some apparent evidence to back them up, that the voluntary social segregation practiced by the public prior to lockdown had already started to suppress the virus: the peak of Covid deaths seems to have happened too soon after the date of formal lockdown for the subsequent downward trend to be attributable to that decision - in other words, that the formal lockdown was both excessive and unnecessary.

    If that's true then you could still draw the conclusion that the level of mass casualties predicted by the Imperial model might have occurred had the behaviour of the population continued *exactly* as normal, but even that is disputable. If any of the theories regarding naturally occurring resistance in the population, or full or partial immunity conferred by previous infection with other coronaviruses, transpire to be correct then both the lethality of the virus to the average patient and its ability to spread through the population as a whole may have been greatly overestimated.

    When the inevitable enquiries into the handling of the pandemic take place then I expect a major bone of contention to be whether the use of a whole population lockdown to deal with it was like the sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut: an excessively blunt instrument which will end up causing more harm than good, because of the scale and effect of the economic damage that it has caused. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, of course, but it may very well turn out that a combination of targeted measures taken more quickly - proper defence of the care homes, segregated hospitals for Covid patients, self-isolation for the medically vulnerable but perhaps only a ban on mass gatherings and some degree of face covering use for everyone else, and an order to work from home where possible - might have done a better job of preserving life without shuttering whole sectors of the economy and precipitating mass unemployment.
    Yes, but I think one of the keys here is "taken more quickly". Having let things get out of control governments took whatever measures they could, without knowing which ones wouldn't be cost-effective. Looking at Lombardy lockdown measures got more and more strict as numbers remained high.

    There also seemed to be a very rapid switch in most of Europe from "Things are under control" to "It's inevitable that the majority of people will get this" which were, I think, both big mistakes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    Black_Rook said:

    Nigelb said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?
    All I'd say about the three million claim is that it comes from a group at Imperial College using their model to justify the use of their model.

    Like all of the epidemiological models of this illness - and the Imperial model appears to be the one most argued over - it represents a guess and may very well be wrong. Others have suggested, with some apparent evidence to back them up, that the voluntary social segregation practiced by the public prior to lockdown had already started to suppress the virus: the peak of Covid deaths seems to have happened too soon after the date of formal lockdown for the subsequent downward trend to be attributable to that decision - in other words, that the formal lockdown was both excessive and unnecessary.

    If that's true then you could still draw the conclusion that the level of mass casualties predicted by the Imperial model might have occurred had the behaviour of the population continued *exactly* as normal, but even that is disputable. If any of the theories regarding naturally occurring resistance in the population, or full or partial immunity conferred by previous infection with other coronaviruses, transpire to be correct then both the lethality of the virus to the average patient and its ability to spread through the population as a whole may have been greatly overestimated.

    When the inevitable enquiries into the handling of the pandemic take place then I expect a major bone of contention to be whether the use of a whole population lockdown to deal with it was like the sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut: an excessively blunt instrument which will end up causing more harm than good, because of the scale and effect of the economic damage that it has caused. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, of course, but it may very well turn out that a combination of targeted measures taken more quickly - proper defence of the care homes, segregated hospitals for Covid patients, self-isolation for the medically vulnerable but perhaps only a ban on mass gatherings and some degree of face covering use for everyone else, and an order to work from home where possible - might have done a better job of preserving life without shuttering whole sectors of the economy and precipitating mass unemployment.
    Whole population lockdowns were absolutely not necessary - where governments reacted quickly enough. As South Korea, for one, demonstrated.
    And if they reacted quickly with a less targeted whole population lockdown, they are still in a far better place than we are.

    Where they didn’t react quickly - like here - it’s absurd to posit that they might have then had the understanding and expertise to react in a more targeted manner.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    https://twitter.com/cjane87/status/1270065350974070785
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,135
    Yokes said:

    The commonly touted stat is that there are more legally held privately owned weapons in the US than citizens. This fails to account for the gun nut for whom multiple weapons are standard.

    In actual reality probably a third of US citizens directly own a legally held weapon or weapons. Some surveys suggest Switzerland may be as high as 20% then there is Israel, where there is a tremendous amount of officially sanctioned firearms in citizen hands but truly private ownership is actually very very tightly controlled.

    The difference is the attitude, the latter two countries operate within a system where oversight and control is expected and they accept the states authority. The US, however, has a significant population of gun owners who think the state is an enemy or at least deeply suspect and having a cabinet full of weaponry is part of the checks and balances against an over-reaching government.

    How is that accountability working? Has the government over reached by perhaps locking up 5 times as many citizens as the rest of the world? Or 15 times as many black citizens as the global average?

    Perhaps there are better checks and balances than assault rifles in every street.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,967
    “Strategically deflated tyres”...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,881
    Mr. kle4, quite.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,197
    Having spent weeks complaining about schools going back, teachers on the BBC are now complaining about schools not going back.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,212
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Dean, was it not designed by skill labourers, but the heavy lifting/rolling done by slave labour?

    Why is everyone assuming that ‘skilled labourers’ and ‘slaves’ are mutually exclusive?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,135
    Nigelb said:

    Black_Rook said:

    Nigelb said:

    houndtang said:

    Anabobazina said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Anabobazina said:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

    This virus just gets stranger and stranger.
    Doesn’t it just?

    If that’s true, the entire R policy would appear to be completely pointless.
    Is anyone still buying this bollocks? The whole thing has been totally pointless. Countries that basically ignored the virus are doing no worse than those that totally overreacted to it. No one knows shit and governments and 'scientists' are making it up as they go it seems.
    Lockdwon probably saved about three million lives in Europe, thus far.

    Which are those countries that ‘basically ignored’ the virus that are doing no worse ?
    All I'd say about the three million claim is that it comes from a group at Imperial College using their model to justify the use of their model.

    Like all of the epidemiological models of this illness - and the Imperial model appears to be the one most argued over - it represents a guess and may very well be wrong. Others have suggested, with some apparent evidence to back them up, that the voluntary social segregation practiced by the public prior to lockdown had already started to suppress the virus: the peak of Covid deaths seems to have happened too soon after the date of formal lockdown for the subsequent downward trend to be attributable to that decision - in other words, that the formal lockdown was both excessive and unnecessary.

    If that's true then you could still draw the conclusion that the level of mass casualties predicted by the Imperial model might have occurred had the behaviour of the population continued *exactly* as normal, but even that is disputable. If any of the theories regarding naturally occurring resistance in the population, or full or partial immunity conferred by previous infection with other coronaviruses, transpire to be correct then both the lethality of the virus to the average patient and its ability to spread through the population as a whole may have been greatly overestimated.

    When the inevitable enquiries into the handling of the pandemic take place then I expect a major bone of contention to be whether the use of a whole population lockdown to deal with it was like the sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut: an excessively blunt instrument which will end up causing more harm than good, because of the scale and effect of the economic damage that it has caused. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, of course, but it may very well turn out that a combination of targeted measures taken more quickly - proper defence of the care homes, segregated hospitals for Covid patients, self-isolation for the medically vulnerable but perhaps only a ban on mass gatherings and some degree of face covering use for everyone else, and an order to work from home where possible - might have done a better job of preserving life without shuttering whole sectors of the economy and precipitating mass unemployment.
    Whole population lockdowns were absolutely not necessary - where governments reacted quickly enough. As South Korea, for one, demonstrated.
    And if they reacted quickly with a less targeted whole population lockdown, they are still in a far better place than we are.

    Where they didn’t react quickly - like here - it’s absurd to posit that they might have then had the understanding and expertise to react in a more targeted manner.
    You are assuming countries face similar level of risks before policy decisions are made.

    Asia doesnt have seasonal flu or cold outbreaks to the extent that Western Europe does, which has big peaks in winter thru early spring. This was also true in the years long before mask usage or other measures were taken in Asia. Covid spreads thru similar, if slightly different, mechanisms to flus and colds.

    I think the reasonable assumption is that Western Europe faced a bigger challenge than South Korea.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025