politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Johnson care home comment row – Day 2

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/PeterHoskinsTV/status/1280472768350351360

Maybe Ineos don;t like investing in a country run by a marxist corbynite.

Private sector firms which rely on profit to exist can be funny like that.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Apparently the problem with Starkey's dropped bollock was down to a comprehension problem. I'm guessing it isn't his own comprehension he's talking about.

'The historian said the “misunderstanding of my words in no way reflects my views or practice on race”.'

Not dissimilar to the way we poor oiks have misunderstood “Too many care homes didn’t really follow the procedures”. We really need to up our game.

Johnson was defended by Alok Sharma this morning on the grounds that "there weren't any procedures" therefore he - Johnson - was not criticizing care home staff who had "done brilliantly".

Those Johnson comments again - "care homes did not always follow the procedures."

This is gaslighting but so as not to cause @TOPPING a brain-ache let's call it what it also is - trolling. Trolling care home workers. Trolling anybody with a care for integrity and competence in government.

We need another election asap imo. The country has made a clear and grievous error. We deserve a chance to rectify matters before too much damage is done.

When this all comes out I very much doubt anyone will come out of this well and to be honest Starmer would not have been any better

And as for an election it is four years away and no amount of wishing is going to change that

To be highly speculative and partisan, Starmer would not have been any better, I think would be a slightly fairer way of putting that.

Next election? Yes, 2024 in all probability. Long time. Much damage possible by then. So much damage.

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

kinabalu said:

Late to this and I'm sure I'm only echoing what everyone bar the most supine of Johnson sycophants have said already but really - what appalling comments. Seeking to deflect blame for the care home fiasco (which cost thousands of lives) onto the front line staff who worked for peanuts through the epidemic whilst he faffed around to no great effect except for ensuring we have the worst covid outcome in the world. Quite incredible. How low can this man go? How on earth have we ended up with an individual like this as our PM? Answers on a postcard.

Have we already discussed this article?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/boris-johnson-brexit-coronavirus

I think it is a brilliant article giving me new insights into the nature of leadership (dependence on followers) and also Boris's strengths and weakneses.  

"His brilliance lay in his performance as the non-political politician. Not well prepared, but chaotic. Not carefully controlled, but outrageous. Not dignified, but happy to appear a buffoon. Even the look – rumpled suit, tousled hair – and the name, Boris, foreswore the traditional politician’s dignity. Everything his political critics saw as gaffes and weaknesses actually served to affirm his anti-political identity, and their outrage marginalised themselves rather than Johnson.

None of this was accidental. Johnson’s apparently dishevelled, disorganised, improvised buffoonery was in fact very carefully rehearsed. His brilliance did not come despite his blundering. His blundering was his brilliance."

This is how we ended up with an individual like this as our PM. The answer isn't on a postcard but in this article.

Thanks. A depressing read but it rings true. The "Boris" brand - which we discussed at length a few days ago - is a killer. It's fooled millions and continues to do so. And amongst those it doesn't fool there are plenty on the Tory side who are happy to go with it because it delivers at the polls. He's not as malevolent as Trump - not even close imo - but in the sense of being a phony and a shallow populist with only his own interests at heart he is our Trump. And I fear we're stuck with him for quite some time. Woe is us.

Why are we supposed to applaud The Guardian for taking 15 years to notice this?

I agree that the notion of "Boris" as pure (and very successful) brand is not the most blindingly original observation. However when floated on here recently many bridled.

We ended up with this man as PM because the choice for PM was between a flawed Boris and a flawed Marxist. The political law of comparative advantage applied.

What on earth else was a centrist voter to do?

The effective choice as regards outcome was -

Johnson Con majority and Brexit OR Corbyn Lab minority and Remain.

All intelligent floaters or centrists who voted did so with the above calculus available to draw on. All made their decision. All own it.

Absolutely. All credit to the intelligent floaters or centrists who looked at that and overwhelmingly made the right decision.

In your opinion

F1: seems Haas' brakes failed due to overheating.

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Apparently the problem with Starkey's dropped bollock was down to a comprehension problem. I'm guessing it isn't his own comprehension he's talking about.

'The historian said the “misunderstanding of my words in no way reflects my views or practice on race”.'

Not dissimilar to the way we poor oiks have misunderstood “Too many care homes didn’t really follow the procedures”. We really need to up our game.

Johnson was defended by Alok Sharma this morning on the grounds that "there weren't any procedures" therefore he - Johnson - was not criticizing care home staff who had "done brilliantly".

Those Johnson comments again - "care homes did not always follow the procedures."

This is gaslighting but so as not to cause @TOPPING a brain-ache let's call it what it also is - trolling. Trolling care home workers. Trolling anybody with a care for integrity and competence in government.

We need another election asap imo. The country has made a clear and grievous error. We deserve a chance to rectify matters before too much damage is done.

When this all comes out I very much doubt anyone will come out of this well and to be honest Starmer would not have been any better

And as for an election it is four years away and no amount of wishing is going to change that

To be highly speculative and partisan, Starmer would not have been any better, I think would be a slightly fairer way of putting that.

Next election? Yes, 2024 in all probability. Long time. Much damage possible by then. So much damage.

To be fair, Starmer has consistently been following, rather than leading, the crowd on COVID. Maybe he'd have done better than Johnson, but I don't see the evidence for it. Given his temperament I imagine he'd have been just as paralysed at the prospect of spending government money or damaging the economy as Johnson was.

https://twitter.com/MarinaHyde/status/1280476089496862724

NHS England has released its latest detailed data.

The amount of English residents who have died of Covid without a preexisting condition stands at 1,366 to date from a population of 56.2 million.

The figure for the under-60s is 301.

I'd venture that most of the public would believe those numbers to be orders of magnitude higher.

Interesting Betfair market on Senate majority, they don't count Independents as Dem even if they caucus with them so the Dems will need to get to 53 senators to win in this market. Accordingly it's longer than most markets at bookies, but even 3.5 is arguably short.

https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.170351353

turbotubbs said:

Nigelb said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/GMB/status/1280407255515619329

Honestly, I'd like to see how much he has taken out of his company over the last decade and then compare it to how much was spent on infectious disease planning. These owners are basically all shysters and troughers.

Do you have that attitude for all sectors of business?

The only reason energy is expensive is that the owners of energy companies are all shysters and troughers?

Should we nationalise everything and become a Communist utopia in your eyes?

Well no, they all went to their shareholders for cash calls in the last few months. That's what shareholders are for. I'm taking issue with this idea that the government should take the blame for carehome owners not wanting to spend the money they needed to.

The government pays for care (or private individuals do) so if the costs for PPE goes up then the government needs to pay more and/or fees need to go up.

Again, at the beginning of the pandemic, we know that the NHS with the unlimited resources of government behind it was unable to access adequate PPE for a time. Care homes, however well managed (and both we and government knew that many aren't), quite clearly would be in a worse situation.
To expect that Covid patients could safely be dumped on care homes was simply irresponsible.

I think it was the complete lack of testing before putting residents back in care homes that was the most irresponsible decision of this crisis. It should have been possible to test a few thousand people for the virus before sending them back, that no one in PHE thought to do it is another indictment of that organisation which has completely failed the country time and again. The original decision to free up bed space for expected incoming patients made sense, but the manner in which it was achieved gave the worst possible outcome.

I don't disagree with that.
The failings of public health are not, of course, the sole responsibility of the current government. The decline in capacity began two decades ago, and problems were likely exacerbated by Lansley separating the service out from the rest of healthcare.

PHE is, of course, the organisation tasked with contagious disease surveillance and control, and it seems clear that they were significantly lacking in capacity, whether management, number and scale of public health laboratories, or sheer numbers of staff available for (eg) contact tracing.

As an aside, the Deputy CMO, whose performance during the pandemic appears lamentable, was formerly a regional director of PHE.

While the decision to empty the hospitals of the clinically well , but in need of care, population is now seen as an error, we also know far more today about asymptotic transmission than we did in March. Someone with no symptoms in hospital for say 5 days would have been seen as not in need of a test back then. Now we know different.

That's tending towards being my favourite typo today, but it may never get there.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Apparently the problem with Starkey's dropped bollock was down to a comprehension problem. I'm guessing it isn't his own comprehension he's talking about.

'The historian said the “misunderstanding of my words in no way reflects my views or practice on race”.'

Not dissimilar to the way we poor oiks have misunderstood “Too many care homes didn’t really follow the procedures”. We really need to up our game.

Johnson was defended by Alok Sharma this morning on the grounds that "there weren't any procedures" therefore he - Johnson - was not criticizing care home staff who had "done brilliantly".

Those Johnson comments again - "care homes did not always follow the procedures."

This is gaslighting but so as not to cause @TOPPING a brain-ache let's call it what it also is - trolling. Trolling care home workers. Trolling anybody with a care for integrity and competence in government.

We need another election asap imo. The country has made a clear and grievous error. We deserve a chance to rectify matters before too much damage is done.

When this all comes out I very much doubt anyone will come out of this well and to be honest Starmer would not have been any better

And as for an election it is four years away and no amount of wishing is going to change that

To be highly speculative and partisan, Starmer would not have been any better, I think would be a slightly fairer way of putting that.

Next election? Yes, 2024 in all probability. Long time. Much damage possible by then. So much damage.

And by 2024 this Country will be a successful independent trading nation but then optimism wins the day every time, not misery

Ah you’re back to CCHQ bot mode, it was nice having a human for a few weeks. Oh well.

Thankfully I was born optimistic and have no time for pessimism and cynicism

Big_G_NorthWales said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Apparently the problem with Starkey's dropped bollock was down to a comprehension problem. I'm guessing it isn't his own comprehension he's talking about.

'The historian said the “misunderstanding of my words in no way reflects my views or practice on race”.'

Not dissimilar to the way we poor oiks have misunderstood “Too many care homes didn’t really follow the procedures”. We really need to up our game.

Johnson was defended by Alok Sharma this morning on the grounds that "there weren't any procedures" therefore he - Johnson - was not criticizing care home staff who had "done brilliantly".

Those Johnson comments again - "care homes did not always follow the procedures."

This is gaslighting but so as not to cause @TOPPING a brain-ache let's call it what it also is - trolling. Trolling care home workers. Trolling anybody with a care for integrity and competence in government.

We need another election asap imo. The country has made a clear and grievous error. We deserve a chance to rectify matters before too much damage is done.

When this all comes out I very much doubt anyone will come out of this well and to be honest Starmer would not have been any better

And as for an election it is four years away and no amount of wishing is going to change that

To be highly speculative and partisan, Starmer would not have been any better, I think would be a slightly fairer way of putting that.

Next election? Yes, 2024 in all probability. Long time. Much damage possible by then. So much damage.

And by 2024 this Country will be a successful independent trading nation but then optimism wins the day every time, not misery

Ah you’re back to CCHQ bot mode, it was nice having a human for a few weeks. Oh well.

Thankfully I was born optimistic and have no time for pessimism and cynicism

If we'd chosen realism over optimism, maybe there'd be 20,000 or so fewer dead from COVID in this country.

Still, chin up, eh?

There is 16K waiting to back Susan Rice (Veep) at 1.04.

Seems odd for a thin market.

Or am I missing something.

justin124 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

justin124 said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

FPT:
I learned everything I needed to know about Johnson and his ilk working as a waiter when I was a teenager, in a town with a university popular with English public school Oxbridge rejects. The casual rudeness to those considered their social inferiors is entirely familiar. It's no surprise to see him blaming the working class and immigrant workforce, mostly women, who've been risking their own health and wellbeing in minimum wage jobs in the care sector, for the mistakes of his government.

Everything you needed to know from some ra spilling your beer when they gave it to you?

I think more research is needed.

Believe me, much more research was carried out subsequently. Early impressions were entirely confirmed.

The saddest aspect of this though is that so many of those abused in this way by these evil people end up voting for them.

The people you're describing aren't evil, and your referring to them as such without a hint of irony is worrying.

I suspect you need to look at a few mirrors.

I can look in a mirror and do you know what I see?

My reflection.

Not evil. We aren't vampires.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1280473018221953025

Small lead

Dirty Sleazy Tories and Labour on the slide...

Foxy said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1280473018221953025

Small lead

Dirty Sleazy Tories and Labour on the slide...

Lib Dems prepare for Government ..

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Mexicanpete said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Survation shows 44% v 37% lead equal to a 36 seat majority and Boris still ahead of Starmer as best PM

You would not think so if you follow this forum

I think you might have posted this on PB accidentally instead of Leftfootforward.

This forum is remarkably balanced on Starmer. I’m the only real cheer leader

I think you've missed a few including if I can say it, Our Genial Host.

Sunil has had vote Starmer as his avatar for months.

contrarian said:

Anabobazina said:

NHS England has released its latest detailed data.

The amount of English residents who have died of Covid without a preexisting condition stands at 1,366 to date from a population of 56.2 million.

The figure for the under-60s is 301.

I'd venture that most of the public would believe those numbers to be orders of magnitude higher.

Sledgehammer, nail.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/time-think-differently/trends-disease-and-disability-long-term-conditions-multi-morbidity

rottenborough said:

There is 16K waiting to back Susan Rice (Veep) at 1.04.

Seems odd for a thin market.

Or am I missing something.

That does seem very odd indeed - implies her price is sub 1.04, do you mean waiting to lay her at 1.04 ?

justin124 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

justin124 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

justin124 said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

FPT:
I learned everything I needed to know about Johnson and his ilk working as a waiter when I was a teenager, in a town with a university popular with English public school Oxbridge rejects. The casual rudeness to those considered their social inferiors is entirely familiar. It's no surprise to see him blaming the working class and immigrant workforce, mostly women, who've been risking their own health and wellbeing in minimum wage jobs in the care sector, for the mistakes of his government.

Everything you needed to know from some ra spilling your beer when they gave it to you?

I think more research is needed.

Believe me, much more research was carried out subsequently. Early impressions were entirely confirmed.

The saddest aspect of this though is that so many of those abused in this way by these evil people end up voting for them.

The people you're describing aren't evil, and your referring to them as such without a hint of irony is worrying.

I suspect you need to look at a few mirrors.

I can look in a mirror and do you know what I see?

My reflection.

Not evil. We aren't vampires.

I was referring to those who smash up restaurants etc and treat waiters et al with contempt. Such people are evil - clearly lower forms of life..

Oh I misunderstood. You mean protestors?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Thankfully I was born optimistic and have no time for pessimism and cynicism

This was mindless stuff, but it exposed the state of mind of Johnson and the Vote Leave hegemony. What matters is not objective truth. It is the power of positive ­thinking. It is not necessary to take into account the ­actual willingness of India or Canada or Australia to enter a British-led free trade zone. It is not necessary to think about what Trump means when he says America First. For Johnson, and for the wider nexus of Brexiteers, attitude alone shapes outcomes. Everything comes down to belief. The X Factor in this mentality is not ability – as in the TV talent contest – it is the undaunted determination to follow the dream.

Apply this to coronavirus and the key thing was not to be afraid of it. Faced with a threat of this magnitude, fear was both the proper, and the necessary, response. Not panic, of course, but the kind of ­rational dread that provokes urgency. To fall into Johnson’s own infantile language, the need was not for gloomsters but certainly for doomsters. Real, literal doom was in the air for hundreds of thousands, perhaps ­millions of people.

https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/07/fatal-delusions-boris-johnson

https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1280477983849971712

rottenborough said:

There is 16K waiting to back Susan Rice (Veep) at 1.04.

Seems odd for a thin market.

Or am I missing something.

There is £8K at 1.03 and £4K at 1.04 waiting to back Elizabeth Warren.

Perhaps it's there to catch a strong rumour that crashes the price, picks up the bets, and then the rumour proves to be wrong? Could that be a betting strategy?

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

kinabalu said:

Late to this and I'm sure I'm only echoing what everyone bar the most supine of Johnson sycophants have said already but really - what appalling comments. Seeking to deflect blame for the care home fiasco (which cost thousands of lives) onto the front line staff who worked for peanuts through the epidemic whilst he faffed around to no great effect except for ensuring we have the worst covid outcome in the world. Quite incredible. How low can this man go? How on earth have we ended up with an individual like this as our PM? Answers on a postcard.

Have we already discussed this article?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/boris-johnson-brexit-coronavirus

I think it is a brilliant article giving me new insights into the nature of leadership (dependence on followers) and also Boris's strengths and weakneses.  

"His brilliance lay in his performance as the non-political politician. Not well prepared, but chaotic. Not carefully controlled, but outrageous. Not dignified, but happy to appear a buffoon. Even the look – rumpled suit, tousled hair – and the name, Boris, foreswore the traditional politician’s dignity. Everything his political critics saw as gaffes and weaknesses actually served to affirm his anti-political identity, and their outrage marginalised themselves rather than Johnson.

None of this was accidental. Johnson’s apparently dishevelled, disorganised, improvised buffoonery was in fact very carefully rehearsed. His brilliance did not come despite his blundering. His blundering was his brilliance."

This is how we ended up with an individual like this as our PM. The answer isn't on a postcard but in this article.

Thanks. A depressing read but it rings true. The "Boris" brand - which we discussed at length a few days ago - is a killer. It's fooled millions and continues to do so. And amongst those it doesn't fool there are plenty on the Tory side who are happy to go with it because it delivers at the polls. He's not as malevolent as Trump - not even close imo - but in the sense of being a phony and a shallow populist with only his own interests at heart he is our Trump. And I fear we're stuck with him for quite some time. Woe is us.

Why are we supposed to applaud The Guardian for taking 15 years to notice this?

I agree that the notion of "Boris" as pure (and very successful) brand is not the most blindingly original observation. However when floated on here recently many bridled.

We ended up with this man as PM because the choice for PM was between a flawed Boris and a flawed Marxist. The political law of comparative advantage applied.

What on earth else was a centrist voter to do?

The effective choice as regards outcome was -

Johnson Con majority and Brexit OR Corbyn Lab minority and Remain.

All intelligent floaters or centrists who voted did so with the above calculus available to draw on. All made their decision. All own it.

Absolutely. All credit to the intelligent floaters or centrists who looked at that and overwhelmingly made the right decision.

But they are coming to regret it. One could say "tough tittie" but that would be small and low. The key thing is to plot and execute the rescue mission in 2024 or (hopefully) before.

This is an example of evil.

http://twitter.com/1/statuses/1280333431067611136

turbotubbs said:

Nigelb said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/GMB/status/1280407255515619329

Honestly, I'd like to see how much he has taken out of his company over the last decade and then compare it to how much was spent on infectious disease planning. These owners are basically all shysters and troughers.

Do you have that attitude for all sectors of business?

The only reason energy is expensive is that the owners of energy companies are all shysters and troughers?

Should we nationalise everything and become a Communist utopia in your eyes?

Well no, they all went to their shareholders for cash calls in the last few months. That's what shareholders are for. I'm taking issue with this idea that the government should take the blame for carehome owners not wanting to spend the money they needed to.

The government pays for care (or private individuals do) so if the costs for PPE goes up then the government needs to pay more and/or fees need to go up.

Again, at the beginning of the pandemic, we know that the NHS with the unlimited resources of government behind it was unable to access adequate PPE for a time. Care homes, however well managed (and both we and government knew that many aren't), quite clearly would be in a worse situation.
To expect that Covid patients could safely be dumped on care homes was simply irresponsible.

I think it was the complete lack of testing before putting residents back in care homes that was the most irresponsible decision of this crisis. It should have been possible to test a few thousand people for the virus before sending them back, that no one in PHE thought to do it is another indictment of that organisation which has completely failed the country time and again. The original decision to free up bed space for expected incoming patients made sense, but the manner in which it was achieved gave the worst possible outcome.

I don't disagree with that.
The failings of public health are not, of course, the sole responsibility of the current government. The decline in capacity began two decades ago, and problems were likely exacerbated by Lansley separating the service out from the rest of healthcare.

PHE is, of course, the organisation tasked with contagious disease surveillance and control, and it seems clear that they were significantly lacking in capacity, whether management, number and scale of public health laboratories, or sheer numbers of staff available for (eg) contact tracing.

As an aside, the Deputy CMO, whose performance during the pandemic appears lamentable, was formerly a regional director of PHE.

While the decision to empty the hospitals of the clinically well , but in need of care, population is now seen as an error, we also know far more today about asymptotic transmission than we did in March. Someone with no symptoms in hospital for say 5 days would have been seen as not in need of a test back then. Now we know different.

The guff about asymptomatic transmission, in this context, is pure deflection.

For a start, there were numerous papers recommending a 14 day quarantine period for travellers from areas with outbreaks, as early as January this year.*
It's basic public health not to move people from an area of infection into a vulnerable community.

Moreover, if you look at the actual discharge guidance, there is no reference to asymptomatic individuals.
And those discharge requirements were issued at the same time as Public Health England removed Covid-19's classification as a "High consequence infectious disease".

(*edit - and references to asymptomatic viral shedding back in February.
The Japanese found around 40% of the cruise ship infected to be asymptomatic, and noted the risk that they could be infectious. The paper was published on February 11th.)

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1280448898797056000

Floater said:

contrarian said:

Anabobazina said:

NHS England has released its latest detailed data.

The amount of English residents who have died of Covid without a preexisting condition stands at 1,366 to date from a population of 56.2 million.

The figure for the under-60s is 301.

I'd venture that most of the public would believe those numbers to be orders of magnitude higher.

Sledgehammer, nail.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/time-think-differently/trends-disease-and-disability-long-term-conditions-multi-morbidity

If 15 million English residents have a preexisting condition, 41 million English residents do not right?

So out of 41 million people without comorbidity, 1,366 have died from Covid, the vast majority of whom are 60+.

Even without controlling for age, that's a rate of 0.003% – is that right?

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1280448898797056000?s=20

Is this what BJ meant when he said there would be no border in the Irish Sea and guaranteed that businesses would face no extra costs or checks? Either I fear my comprehension skills have once again let me down, or BJ is a lying ****. I'll have to ponder long and hard on which it is.

brokenwheel said:

rottenborough said:

" the [Trump] campaign is counting on the TV jousting matches that are the forthcoming debates to make mince-meat of “Sleepy Joe”."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/07/06/donald-trump-set-stage-dramatic-presidential-comeback-history/

There aren't going to be any TV debates, the Dems aren't that stupid.

"The first presidential debate, when the incumbent President Trump will face off against Joe Biden, will be held on Tuesday, September 29 at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. "
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/politics/a32082680/presidential-debates-joe-biden-donald-trump-schedule/

Anabobazina said:

Floater said:

contrarian said:

Anabobazina said:

NHS England has released its latest detailed data.

The amount of English residents who have died of Covid without a preexisting condition stands at 1,366 to date from a population of 56.2 million.

The figure for the under-60s is 301.

I'd venture that most of the public would believe those numbers to be orders of magnitude higher.

Sledgehammer, nail.

https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/time-think-differently/trends-disease-and-disability-long-term-conditions-multi-morbidity

If 15 million English residents have a preexisting condition, 41 million English residents do not right?

So out of 41 million people without comorbidity, 1,366 have died from Covid, the vast majority of whom are 60+.

Even without controlling for age, that's a rate of 0.003% – is that right?

Looking at the Italian numbers, I remember that even up to under 80 with one co-morbidity was still pretty low.

You had to be over 80 with two or more co-morbidities to be really in the danger zone.

Theuniondivvie said:

BluestBlue said:

Stuartinromford said:

eek said:

Boris - when in a hole never admit you are in a hole... Just keep digging and eventually you will get out.

Fairly soon I think this philosophy is going to result in him being buried alive..

Unfortunately, I'm increasingly of the view that the remarks made here by a government loyalist in the early days of Dom's Adventures in Durhamland were right. Not morally right, but an accurate reflection of reality.

Unless 40+ Conservative MPs defect to the opposition, or 183 vote against him in an internal vote of confidence, there's no reason for him to go anywhere. And having purged the most obvious traitors in 2019, those are both huge hurdles.

There's no actual process to get Boris or his favourites out before 2024. So until then, we plebs should just jog on. I think some of them enjoy the impotent rage.

Freezing Stamp Duty? £1.3 billion
Cost of the Job Retention Scheme? £123 billion
Watching Piers Morgan rant and wail because Boris dared to demure from his sacred view of Who Is To Blame?

Priceless

You've misspelt demur.
I know as a classicist and alumni of one of the UK's great universities (as you never tire of telling us) that you're a stickler for that kind of thing, and would prefer to have it pointed out.

LOL, they churn out these thick as mince tossers with 2:1's by the barrow load

eek said:

CarlottaVance said:

And to conclude the BBC NEWS at ONE the BBC goes to Somerset where the staff at a Care Home have been living in the home for 3 months away from their families to protect the residents have finally met their families again...

Nice top and tail to the nice.

Top Boris says care workers didn't do enough
Tail Care workers shown to have dropped everything for 3 months to care fo people....

Just one more thing to add to the "One Rule for us, another rule for you" message which will eventually destroy the tory party.

I wonder if Boris' actual care staff in ICU are all on promises of hereditary peerages to not open their mouths about what they might really think.

Foxy said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Was this site mostly pro or anti Brexit during the referendum?

Pretty even

...under the line, the thread headers were almost all anti-Brexit, and in the years leading up to the referendum being announced, the headers used to tell us no one cared about the issue anyway

Theuniondivvie said:

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1280448898797056000?s=20

Is this what BJ meant when he said there would be no border in the Irish Sea and guaranteed that businesses would face no extra costs or checks? Either I fear my comprehension skills have once again let me down, or BJ is a lying ****. I'll have to ponder long and hard on which it is.

I am quite glad that our government has decided to honour the WDA. At one time it looked as if we were going to break our word.

Foxy said:

brokenwheel said:

rottenborough said:

" the [Trump] campaign is counting on the TV jousting matches that are the forthcoming debates to make mince-meat of “Sleepy Joe”."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/07/06/donald-trump-set-stage-dramatic-presidential-comeback-history/

There aren't going to be any TV debates, the Dems aren't that stupid.

Biden was expected to flop in the Primary debates, yet came out the winner...

Biden didn't say that much during the debates while the others argued amongst themselves. In fact he complained multiple times about not being able to get a word in, which was probably for the best.

logical_song said:

brokenwheel said:

rottenborough said:

" the [Trump] campaign is counting on the TV jousting matches that are the forthcoming debates to make mince-meat of “Sleepy Joe”."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/07/06/donald-trump-set-stage-dramatic-presidential-comeback-history/

There aren't going to be any TV debates, the Dems aren't that stupid.

"The first presidential debate, when the incumbent President Trump will face off against Joe Biden, will be held on Tuesday, September 29 at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. "
https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/politics/a32082680/presidential-debates-joe-biden-donald-trump-schedule/

And then...

Do not be surprised if the other debates are cancelled.

Theuniondivvie said:

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1280448898797056000?s=20

Is this what BJ meant when he said there would be no border in the Irish Sea and guaranteed that businesses would face no extra costs or checks? Either I fear my comprehension skills have once again let me down, or BJ is a lying ****. I'll have to ponder long and hard on which it is.

Not sure I should be responding to you after the alumni/alumnus incident but let me save you 25 milliseconds - it's b).

Stark_Dawning said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Was this site mostly pro or anti Brexit during the referendum?

Massively pro-Brexit. Only a few brave souls stayed to do their bit against the shrill rants of 'traitor. Traitor! TRAITOR!' that consumed the place.

No it wasn't, the only polling of PB voting intention had more LDs than average and fewer UKIP than the national average in 2015.

Those who did back Leave on here tended to be soft Brexiteers, you can count the pro WTO Terms Brexit backers on here on 1 hand

HYUFD said:

Stark_Dawning said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Was this site mostly pro or anti Brexit during the referendum?

Massively pro-Brexit. Only a few brave souls stayed to do their bit against the shrill rants of 'traitor. Traitor! TRAITOR!' that consumed the place.

No it wasn't, the only polling of PB voting intention had more LDs than average and fewer UKIP than the national average in 2015.

Those who did back Leave on here tended to be soft Brexiteers, you can count the pro WTO Terms Brexit backers on here on 1 hand

As diehard Remainers you and I gave it our best shot but at times there's no telling some folk.

isam said:

TOPPING said:

eek said:

TOPPING said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Was this site mostly pro or anti Brexit during the referendum?

By IQ? Overwhelmingly Remain.

Hmm, RCS1000 doesn't exactly have a low IQ...

A blind spot.

The biggest of which, common to many Leavers on here, was "this is not what I voted for/thought was going to happen/the action of any kind of sane government".

Then you have the @Richard_Tyndalls and @isams and @Casino_Royales of this world for whom any flavour of out is better than any flavour of in although don't mention EEA/EFTA or you'll have them fighting like cats in a sack.

That’s not true, I would happily have voted remain if they stopped FOM.

Gotit.

Although that is a hypothetical too far given it was an impossibility. To amend a popular aunt/uncle saying, it's like saying you would happily shag Gordon Brown if he was female, 5ft 8ins and a supermodel.

TOPPING said:

algarkirk said:

kinabalu said:

isam said:

kinabalu said:

Barnesian said:

kinabalu said:

Late to this and I'm sure I'm only echoing what everyone bar the most supine of Johnson sycophants have said already but really - what appalling comments. Seeking to deflect blame for the care home fiasco (which cost thousands of lives) onto the front line staff who worked for peanuts through the epidemic whilst he faffed around to no great effect except for ensuring we have the worst covid outcome in the world. Quite incredible. How low can this man go? How on earth have we ended up with an individual like this as our PM? Answers on a postcard.

Have we already discussed this article?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/06/boris-johnson-brexit-coronavirus

I think it is a brilliant article giving me new insights into the nature of leadership (dependence on followers) and also Boris's strengths and weakneses.  

"His brilliance lay in his performance as the non-political politician. Not well prepared, but chaotic. Not carefully controlled, but outrageous. Not dignified, but happy to appear a buffoon. Even the look – rumpled suit, tousled hair – and the name, Boris, foreswore the traditional politician’s dignity. Everything his political critics saw as gaffes and weaknesses actually served to affirm his anti-political identity, and their outrage marginalised themselves rather than Johnson.

None of this was accidental. Johnson’s apparently dishevelled, disorganised, improvised buffoonery was in fact very carefully rehearsed. His brilliance did not come despite his blundering. His blundering was his brilliance."

This is how we ended up with an individual like this as our PM. The answer isn't on a postcard but in this article.

Thanks. A depressing read but it rings true. The "Boris" brand - which we discussed at length a few days ago - is a killer. It's fooled millions and continues to do so. And amongst those it doesn't fool there are plenty on the Tory side who are happy to go with it because it delivers at the polls. He's not as malevolent as Trump - not even close imo - but in the sense of being a phony and a shallow populist with only his own interests at heart he is our Trump. And I fear we're stuck with him for quite some time. Woe is us.

Why are we supposed to applaud The Guardian for taking 15 years to notice this?

I agree that the notion of "Boris" as pure (and very successful) brand is not the most blindingly original observation. However when floated on here recently many bridled.

We ended up with this man as PM because the choice for PM was between a flawed Boris and a flawed Marxist. The political law of comparative advantage applied.

What on earth else was a centrist voter to do?

He needs telling this a few times.

He rants and raves about Boris and indeed, I yield to no one in my estimation of him as a useless, solipsistic twat.

But the effing Labour Party, of which I believe @kinabalu is a supporter, put Jeremy Effing Corbyn up against him so what did they expect to happen!?

"Yebbut we came so close in 2017, only 55 seats fewer than the Tories!"

Foxy said:

Theuniondivvie said:

https://twitter.com/BBCNewsNI/status/1280448898797056000?s=20

Is this what BJ meant when he said there would be no border in the Irish Sea and guaranteed that businesses would face no extra costs or checks? Either I fear my comprehension skills have once again let me down, or BJ is a lying ****. I'll have to ponder long and hard on which it is.

I am quite glad that our government has decided to honour the WDA. At one time it looked as if we were going to break our word.

It rather negates all the tough guy bluster about calling the EU bluff and negotiating down to the wire, unless the unlucky Norns are going to be left out of our exciting Global UK future.

MattW said:

turbotubbs said:

Nigelb said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/GMB/status/1280407255515619329

Honestly, I'd like to see how much he has taken out of his company over the last decade and then compare it to how much was spent on infectious disease planning. These owners are basically all shysters and troughers.

Do you have that attitude for all sectors of business?

The only reason energy is expensive is that the owners of energy companies are all shysters and troughers?

Should we nationalise everything and become a Communist utopia in your eyes?

Well no, they all went to their shareholders for cash calls in the last few months. That's what shareholders are for. I'm taking issue with this idea that the government should take the blame for carehome owners not wanting to spend the money they needed to.

The government pays for care (or private individuals do) so if the costs for PPE goes up then the government needs to pay more and/or fees need to go up.

Again, at the beginning of the pandemic, we know that the NHS with the unlimited resources of government behind it was unable to access adequate PPE for a time. Care homes, however well managed (and both we and government knew that many aren't), quite clearly would be in a worse situation.
To expect that Covid patients could safely be dumped on care homes was simply irresponsible.

I think it was the complete lack of testing before putting residents back in care homes that was the most irresponsible decision of this crisis. It should have been possible to test a few thousand people for the virus before sending them back, that no one in PHE thought to do it is another indictment of that organisation which has completely failed the country time and again. The original decision to free up bed space for expected incoming patients made sense, but the manner in which it was achieved gave the worst possible outcome.

I don't disagree with that.
The failings of public health are not, of course, the sole responsibility of the current government. The decline in capacity began two decades ago, and problems were likely exacerbated by Lansley separating the service out from the rest of healthcare.

PHE is, of course, the organisation tasked with contagious disease surveillance and control, and it seems clear that they were significantly lacking in capacity, whether management, number and scale of public health laboratories, or sheer numbers of staff available for (eg) contact tracing.

As an aside, the Deputy CMO, whose performance during the pandemic appears lamentable, was formerly a regional director of PHE.

While the decision to empty the hospitals of the clinically well , but in need of care, population is now seen as an error, we also know far more today about asymptotic transmission than we did in March. Someone with no symptoms in hospital for say 5 days would have been seen as not in need of a test back then. Now we know different.

That's tending towards being my favourite typo today, but it may never get there.

very good! I am the first to jump on others getting words wrong, so hoist on my own mallard, as the saying doesn't go...