Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

That’s whose prerogative? – politicalbetting.com

1235»

Comments

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 51,131

    My in-laws live in Canada in the foothills of the Rockies so I can relate to this. Their tiny town, is 2 hour drive from the nearest town and 4 hours drive from the nearest city. When my father in law picks us up from the airport after leaving Edmonton the satnav says "drive 400 km then turn left".

    But the cities and towns are nothing like the cities and towns here. They are massive sprawling places that are completely alien to the UK. Because they can afford to be because they're not constrained artificially, growing into another town or city.

    They are massively socially distanced as a result. Plus it makes it easier to keep a virus in one town or city whereas in the UK Liverpool and Manchester for instance are contiguous with each other and towns in-between like Warrington, Wigan, Leigh and Widnes. They are realistically one single united Metropolis in contrast.
    What are you still doing hanging about over here, when everything about your mindset suggests you’d be much happier in the foothills of the Rockies nursing your rifle and your tins of beans?
  • glwglw Posts: 10,367

    I think your point about excess deaths is very good. The present statistics on death are hugely influenced by what different countries define as a "COVID death".

    Given this gross distortion in the data -- which may be the main thing actually measured in the Tables -- then what further corrections make any sense at this point ?

    My answer is probably none -- just look at the population density, or age demographics, and make a rough allowance.

    Once we have reliable figures for the excess deaths for different countries, then it will be interesting to do exactly what you say -- especially from the point of view of understanding which policies are effective.

    Russia is a good example of the problem. Their excess deaths are running at nearly three times the deaths attributed to COVID-19, which implies that either Russia is undercounting COVID-19 deaths or something else is killing a hell of a lot of Russians this year, and is in fact a worse problem than the current pandemic.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    glw said:

    Sure I get all that. It it still misleading to compare population density when you are talking about COVID-19. Start with the urban population, and then figure out the population density of urban areas to make comparisons if you want. But do not simply use population density, it's extremely misleading, far more so than the differences that exist between urban areas in different countries. e.g. UK population density is 275 per km^2 against 4 per km^2 for Canada. That's almost two orders of magnitude, but Greater London and the Greater Toronto Area are only about a factor of 5 different.
    But, at a person-to-person level, COVID transmission is highly non-linear with distance, it drops to zero beyond some critical distance (which may be ~2m).

    This means it is highly non-linear with respect to average separation, or equivalently, average number density. It may not matter if you are two orders of magnitude, or five times, less than London.

    It may simply matter that you are less than some critical number density.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    edited December 2020

    The median UK house size is 656 square feet.
    The median US house size is 2301 square feet.

    The UK and US are very different nations.

    No.

    If you are quoting the Google snippet, then that is a number from David Wilson Homes for the "average" size of a UK apartment.

    (Multi category article by DHW and a cockup by Google).

    https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk03I3OlA9sAXe2bXfpgucHphyWVC2g:1607181954815&ei=gqbLX5WqMZqP8gK1-raADg&q=median+uk+hpuse+size&oq=median+uk+hpuse+size

    https://www.dwh.co.uk/advice-and-inspiration/average-house-sizes-uk/)

    The UK average house size is more like 850-900 sqft.

    Your point still, in some measure, stands.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695
    glw said:

    Russia is a good example of the problem. Their excess deaths are running at nearly three times the deaths attributed to COVID-19, which implies that either Russia is undercounting COVID-19 deaths or something else is killing a hell of a lot of Russians this year, and is in fact a worse problem than the current pandemic.
    They're all drinking hand sanitiser. That's what's doing for them.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    Great piece, David.

    Thanks.

    I am wondering about precedents from the Restoration.

    It would be interesting to hear the ghost of Tony Benn on this particular subject.
  • betting Post
    F1: decided to back Russell each way for pole at 6.5 (third the odds top 2).

    I reckon it's a three horse race, and his odds are a bit too long. However, my bet is somewhat coloured by my pre-existing position and early Verstappen/Bottas bets.

    I also had a £1 free bet which I stuck on Gasly at 41 for the win, to cover another contingency.

    https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2020/12/sakhir-pre-qualifying-2020.html
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    If Johnson gets a deal I think the Tories have a very good chance of winning the next election.

    No deal would be a gift to Labour and the SNP .

    Even if he has to make some compromises . As for Farage screaming betrayal he would do that regardless of any deal and the public aren’t going to be obsessed over the detail of any deal , only the ERG nutjobs will pick it apart and don’t have the numbers to vote down the deal .

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920

    He's mostly harmless.

    We'll be able to say so long and thanks for all the fish.
    But can we really eat that many fish ourselves?

    I suppose if it's the only food available ...
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920
    IanB2 said:

    What are you still doing hanging about over here, when everything about your mindset suggests you’d be much happier in the foothills of the Rockies nursing your rifle and your tins of beans?
    For God's sake don't encourage him to leave the country now, if he has tins of beans!
  • glwglw Posts: 10,367

    But, at a person-to-person level, COVID transmission is highly non-linear with distance, it drops to zero beyond some critical distance (which may be ~2m).

    This means it is highly non-linear with respect to average separation, or equivalently, average number density. It may not matter if you are two orders of magnitude, or five times, less than London.

    It may simply matter that you are less than some critical number density.

    I agree with you. Ideally we would compare exposure of the population as a whole to situations which are above a safe threshold.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920
    Phil said:

    Well, Brexit has been an exercise in goalpost moving by the Leave ultras ever since the referendum result. This is just the logical end point of that process. Rejoice peasants, as your glorious leaders decide to define WTO terms as a “deal with the EU”.
    Wasn't it Andrea Leadsom who solemnly told us last year that leaving without a deal wouldn't actually mean leaving without a deal?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    MattW said:

    No.

    If you are quoting the Google snippet, then that is a number from David Wilson Homes for the "average" size of a UK apartment.

    (Multi category article by DHW and a cockup by Google).

    https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ALeKk03I3OlA9sAXe2bXfpgucHphyWVC2g:1607181954815&ei=gqbLX5WqMZqP8gK1-raADg&q=median+uk+hpuse+size&oq=median+uk+hpuse+size

    https://www.dwh.co.uk/advice-and-inspiration/average-house-sizes-uk/)

    The UK average house size is more like 850-900 sqft.

    Your point still, in some measure, stands.
    “House” or “dwelling”?

    I’ve a 2 bed apartment that’s over 1,000sq ft, any actual house is going to be bigger than that.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    They're all drinking hand sanitiser. That's what's doing for them.
    Well, what are you supposed to do when the vodka runs out?
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8972801/Seven-die-drinking-coronavirus-hand-sanitiser-alcohol-ran-party-Russia.html
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695
    Sandpit said:

    Well, what are you supposed to do when the vodka runs out?
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8972801/Seven-die-drinking-coronavirus-hand-sanitiser-alcohol-ran-party-Russia.html
    I remember hearing a story about some lad whose party trick was turning water into wine when the booze ran out.

    Sounds made up to me, like.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559
    Scott_xP said:
    But it's Macron throwing the dice, going down the snake.....
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,033

    No it isn't.

    Leaving without any deal at all is leaving the WTO too. North Korea style trade.

    The WTO is itself a deal. It is essentially a fallback deal that we already have, a parachute or safety net so to speak.

    An alternative name I like instead of Australia style trade is World Trade deal.
    Rubbish, WTO/Australia/Whatever is what you get if you have No Deal.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559

    Starmer self isolating. Hopefully he ain't caught it.

    Second time?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,670
    edited December 2020
    Sandpit said:

    “House” or “dwelling”?

    I’ve a 2 bed apartment that’s over 1,000sq ft, any actual house is going to be bigger than that.
    Not necessarily, surprisingly.

    A traditional small 3 bed detached is about 900sqft.

    On a normal new estate afaics, about 60-80% of houses are likely to be under 1000 sqft. The only ones above that will probably be the 4+ bed detached, and maybe some 3 bed detached. Unless you are talking distinctly upmarket.

    You must have too much stuff :smile: .

    I'll raise you "household" or "household". These are 2 definitions from Censuses:

    A "household" is:

    (current definition, from 2011): one person living alone, or a group of people (not necessarily related) living at the same address who share cooking facilities and share a living room, sitting room or dining area. A household can consist of a single family, more than one family or no families in the case of a group of unrelated people.

    (previous definition, from 1996 to 2010): a person living alone, or a group of people living at the same address who have the address as their only or main residence and either share one main meal a day or share living accommodation (or both).

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/articles/familiesandhouseholdsstatisticsexplained/2019-08-07

    Let's not get into "dwelling" ;-)

    A bedsit is a "dwelling", and you may get landed for Band A Council Tax on one.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,856
    There's a lot of anger in America about the unequal impact of coronavirus restrictions. This is a good example:

    https://twitter.com/SpencerKlavan/status/1335007535070253057
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695

    Second time?
    Yes. First time was a false alarm.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559

    I remember hearing a story about some lad whose party trick was turning water into wine when the booze ran out.

    Sounds made up to me, like.
    Legend.....
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,856
    edited December 2020
    Even this seems enough to make the Brexiteers livid. Three more years of the status quo...

    https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1335248494567755776
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362
    Meh, what is three more years?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559
    RobD said:

    Meh, what is three more years?
    Three years to get your shit together, France.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,620
    RobD said:

    Meh, what is three more years?
    Especially as the Brexiteers have sat with their collective thumb up their bum for the last three years. Easiest deal in the world, ovenready, my sharny arse!
  • RobD said:

    Meh, what is three more years?
    Just in time for the 2024 election, that's what three more years is.
  • Carnyx said:

    Especially as the Brexiteers have sat with their collective thumb up their bum for the last three years. Easiest deal in the world, ovenready, my sharny arse!
    I see Neil Kinnock is urging Starmer to not whip a vote for the deal (if it ever comes).

    Too right. Well said Neil.


    Let Johnson totally own this disaster.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559

    Yes. First time was a false alarm.
    That really would be one hell of a black swan in British politics, if Starmer were taken out by Covid.... 2020 playing its joker in the mini marathon.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362

    Just in time for the 2024 election, that's what three more years is.
    A promise delivered just in time then? If there is an end in sight, I don't see there being a huge issue about it. The usual suspects will moan about it not being instant of course.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695
    Another 397 coronavirus deaths have been reported in the UK - compared to 504 on Friday.

    A further 15,539 cases were reported on Saturday compared to 16,298 the day before.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,920

    But it's Macron throwing the dice, going down the snake.....
    Everyone knows No Deal will have very little effect on the UK, but will be catastrophic for the foreigners.

    "Heavy Fog in the Channel. Continent cut off.”
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,856

    I remember hearing a story about some lad whose party trick was turning water into wine when the booze ran out.

    Sounds made up to me, like.
    You didn't Adam and Eve it?
  • Mr. Borough, that's infantile.

    If Starmer believes the deal to be in the UK's interest he has a duty to support it, and to oppose it if he determines the contrary to be true.

    The national interest matters more than petty politicking.

    And it is not so very long ago that Labour MPs were singing a chorus of lamentation that they hadn't backed May's deal.
  • RobD said:

    A promise delivered just in time then? If there is an end in sight, I don't see there being a huge issue about it. The usual suspects will moan about it not being instant of course.
    Yup. Three years costs Boris nothing. It's possibly a plus- like the way councils do planting schemes that flower just before election day. After that, it gets electorally expensive, which is the only cost I think he recognises.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559

    Yup. Three years costs Boris nothing. It's possibly a plus- like the way councils do planting schemes that flower just before election day. After that, it gets electorally expensive, which is the only cost I think he recognises.
    If you'd told Farage in 2015 that within 4 years we could be out of the EU, within 5 years we'd be out of their trading arrangements and legal processes, within 8 we'd have our fishing rights back - he'd have bitten your hand off.

    Assuming he was genuine, and not just in it for a career. The noise he makes now will give an indication as to how genuine he ever was.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362
    If this is the only thing holding a deal back then it must be fairly certain?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,559
    edited December 2020
    On topic - any truth that this is what gets HM the Q up and at the karaoke machine?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cDLZqe735k&ob=av2e
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    edited December 2020
    https://twitter.com/jillongovt/status/1335259655472373760?s=20

    Google:

    Barnier was internally pessimistic, as the FAZ learned. After the cancellation on Friday, he sent members of the Brexit coordination group in the European Parliament an SMS: "It doesn't look good". '
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,695
    Is that it?

    Just call it 6 years and it's time for pizza.
  • If you'd told Farage in 2015 that within 4 years we could be out of the EU, within 5 years we'd be out of their trading arrangements and legal processes, within 8 we'd have our fishing rights back - he'd have bitten your hand off.

    Assuming he was genuine, and not just in it for a career. The noise he makes now will give an indication as to how genuine he ever was.
    There were- and are- genuine people who identified problems with the EU and thought that, with hard work, other systems would be better.

    But the cause also attracted a load of grifters. And the nature of grifting is to offer victims something for nothing, then give them nothing for something.

    Not everyone who campaigned for Leave, or for this government is a grifter.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362
    edited December 2020
    On the EU's fishing demands:

    https://www.instagram.com/p/Bn8Luwbjzf9


    donaldtusk

    A piece of cake, perhaps? Sorry, no cherries.
    #brexit #salzburgsummit2018 #theresamay #donaldtusk #europeancouncil #europeanunion #euco
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    nico679 said:

    If Johnson gets a deal I think the Tories have a very good chance of winning the next election.

    No deal would be a gift to Labour and the SNP .

    Even if he has to make some compromises . As for Farage screaming betrayal he would do that regardless of any deal and the public aren’t going to be obsessed over the detail of any deal , only the ERG nutjobs will pick it apart and don’t have the numbers to vote down the deal .

    Brexit has already lost much of its electoral salience and most people have moved on. As an issue , it would not swing votes on anything like the scale of a year ago.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,601
    edited December 2020
    My crystal ball - 'productive discussion, but significant differences remain, time running out'. Throw in a 'the other side need to decide what they want/compromise' if they are feeling sassy.
  • Why the importance of fish? Presumably everything agreed so far amounts to a laundry list of capitulations on Boris's part, but he needs his fish - he'll reckon he'll be able to wave a haddock around as the ultimate distraction. If he can just get us celebrating fish for a week, then everything will have moved on and he'll be home and dry.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362

    Why the importance of fish? Presumably everything agreed so far amounts to a laundry list of capitulations on Boris's part, but he needs his fish - he'll reckon he'll be able to wave a haddock around as the ultimate distraction. If he can just get us celebrating fish for a week, then everything will have moved on and he'll be home and dry.

    Sounds like either way he'll get it, just may be one or two years later than originally planned.
  • RobD said:

    Sounds like either way he'll get it, just may be one or two years later than originally planned.
    The amount of times we hear fish mentioned by the government will denote how crap the rest of the deal is.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,362
    New thread
  • The amount of times we hear fish mentioned by the government will denote how crap the rest of the deal is.
    It won't be that crap a deal- basically, the EU has an amount of access- demanded alignment tarrif, and we're going to get the access implied by that tarrif, one might almost say algorithm.

    The UK thought that it could get a copy/paste of Canada, but that wasn't going to fly- that access is worth more to us than Canada, so we're giving up more to get it. The UK also though it could get more business being Brilliant Negotiators, which was spoilt by our continued uselessness.

    But the deal will be what it was always going to be, what with how bigger organisations dictate trade terms to smaller ones. Now let's see how well we can operate this deal.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,012
    RobD said:

    If this is the only thing holding a deal back then it must be fairly certain?
    Not what but why. Macron's game is to break the negotiation on fish because he wants no deal and therefore a chance for Paris to get financial services from London. It is a win for him if the UK caves on fish ("look fisherfolk what I have got for you") but also he wins if the UK holds firm and there is no deal. Opprobrium from his EU partners is a small price to pay for this tactic.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 31,327

    Mr. Borough, that's infantile.

    If Starmer believes the deal to be in the UK's interest he has a duty to support it, and to oppose it if he determines the contrary to be true.

    The national interest matters more than petty politicking.

    And it is not so very long ago that Labour MPs were singing a chorus of lamentation that they hadn't backed May's deal.

    Labour MPs lament not supporting May's deal, only because Johnson's deal appears vastly inferior.

    Starmer would be insanely stupid to give Johnson cover by supporting a deal, simply because any deal is better than no deal.

    Abstain, by all means to allow the deal over the line. If Starmer has his fingerprints on a deal which will ultimately be bad for Britain, Johnson will hang the deal around Starmer's neck, claiming Labour's unequivocal support.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    MaxPB said:

    Ah the wee Scotland defence. It's tiresome. The data you quoted was out of date. It is what it is. If you want to split hairs between a rate of 98.5 and 105 then sure, go right ahead.
    Different data source does not mean it is wrong or out of date , mine is from here and updated daily. https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/

    ONS is always weeks/months behind
This discussion has been closed.