This isn’t going to go down well in White House – Trump named “Loser of the Year” – politicalbetting

TheScreamingEagles said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I did call the food plan. Mail telling patriotic Brits to not eat foreign muck like Cod or Pizza and instead enjoy Mutton, Peas, and of course that favourite dish Toast and Chips.

The Daily Mail need to listen to Messrs Casino Royale and Philip Thompson.

IanB2 said:

Malmesbury said:

UK R

From case data




From hospitalisation data

That R graph gives you a headache studying it, but London’s rise from lowest to highest is striking

The key period was middle November, when it appears that London uniquely wasn’t benefitting from the lockdown

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

Malmesbury said:

UK R

From case data




From hospitalisation data

That R graph gives you a headache studying it, but London’s rise from lowest to highest is striking

The key period was middle November, when it appears that London uniquely wasn’t benefitting from the lockdown

London varies a lot though - Richmond, Kensington and Westminster are all about 0.90

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Much worse news for Trump today is this.

You'd have thought that Republican Party elected representatives and officials would have already been well on the road of distancing themselves from the inevitable reputational disaster, now that Trump is officially a loser. It's really odd and very worrying that many of them are, instead, doubling down in supporting him, even in his raving bonkers claims of electoral fraud.

The question is whether the Republican Party tears itself apart over this: I could see Lisa Murkowski, Ben Sasse and Mitt Romney becoming Independents. (Lisa won as a write in candidate before, and would probably win again. Ben Sasse isn't up for another six years. Mitt is much more popular than Trump in Utah.)

If it does fissure, then the inevitable consequence is Democratic hegemony for the next eight years, which would not be good for America.

Those three are in very different categories.

Murkowski is a moderate Republican in a state with a strong tradition of independents, where I believe they are moving to ranked choice voting following a referendum in November. It makes a lot of sense for her to go independent if she comes under primary pressure again from the right.

Romney has set out his stall to fight for the soul of the Republican Party. He's not actually that moderate, and nor is he under great primary threat it seems. He'll stand and fight, I think, and enjoy the battle.

Sasse is actually a pretty conservative Republican who hates Trump personally. He's "independent minded" but I am not sure where he'd be going becoming an independent. He'd not be seeking to wield power as a moderate whose vote is available for a good deal like Murkowski. He's just been reelected so doesn't need to worry too much yet, but is young so does actually presumably want to get reelected again in 2026 in a very red state. I think he'll fight from the inside for a conservative Republican Party where Trump personally isn't welcome.

TheScreamingEagles said:

alex_ said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

Anecdotally there's real trouble brewing on the vaccination front. GP surgeries are increasingly seeing the requirements as unworkable (huge amount of form filling and requirements for consent before issuing the jab, and socially distanced recovery periods of 15 minutes afterwards) and will significantly impact on wider patient care.

They are used to doing 2-3 mass flu clinics every year which are hugely organisational efforts but only temporarily disruptive. Surgeries involved in the jabs are going to find this dominates everything else for months.

From what I've heard, if I didn't know better it appears Matt Hancock has appointed Dido Harding and Chris Grayling to be in charge of the vaccine rollout.

Considering the vaccine will be like gold, the government appears to have not made any provision for security at plenty of surgeries when they are shut.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1337484498418724869

Gaussian said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

alex_ said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

Anecdotally there's real trouble brewing on the vaccination front. GP surgeries are increasingly seeing the requirements as unworkable (huge amount of form filling and requirements for consent before issuing the jab, and socially distanced recovery periods of 15 minutes afterwards) and will significantly impact on wider patient care.

They are used to doing 2-3 mass flu clinics every year which are hugely organisational efforts but only temporarily disruptive. Surgeries involved in the jabs are going to find this dominates everything else for months.

From what I've heard, if I didn't know better it appears Matt Hancock has appointed Dido Harding and Chris Grayling to be in charge of the vaccine rollout.

Considering the vaccine will be like gold, the government appears to have not made any provision for security at plenty of surgeries when they are shut.

Those -70C storage requirements call for some seriously organised criminals.

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.

Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.

Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.

As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.

'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'

Alistair said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.


Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

By far the best Avocados on British shelves come from Spain.

another_richard said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

The increase in cases is very much a London and SE issue. Plus Wales.

Whereas they are stable or still falling in northern England.

Perhaps tier 3 is the key spot.

justin124 said:

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1337484498418724869

That's not a 2.4% swing, that's a 1.2% swing.

rcs1000 said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1337484498418724869

That's not a 2.4% swing, that's a 1.2% swing.

Or maybe a 1.15% swing!

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

From what I'm hearing the rollout of the vaccine is going to be a bit of a fiasco.

Like wot I said, logistics really do matter and the priority list should be based on wherever there are large numbers of people already -- so at the top end, no change, care homes and hospitals. But after that, look to workplaces, universities and the like, rather than go by age which means having to coordinate people living far apart to make appointments then turn up.

TheScreamingEagles said:

turbotubbs said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

From what I'm hearing the rollout of the vaccine is going to be a bit of a fiasco.

Like wot I said, logistics really do matter and the priority list should be based on wherever there are large numbers of people already -- so at the top end, no change, care homes and hospitals. But after that, look to workplaces, universities and the like, rather than go by age which means having to coordinate people living far apart to make appointments then turn up.

FWIW I think the vaccine rollout will be a success by the end of the rollout this is one of those things where the government once more are overpromising and underdelivering.

I think another driver is that the government doesn't have as many doses as it hoped, and optimism is meeting reality.

I suspect when the AZ one is approved, things will get much easier. Far easier to distribute, much more like the flu shots and very possible in community pharmacies.

That will help a lot.

Peter_the_Punter said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

An American friend has pointed out a potential 'fun' issue if Trump does end up in prison.

As a former POTUS Donald Trump is entitled to lifelong Secret Service protection. So does that mean the Secret Service get to guard Trump inside prison?

If not Trump might have to get used to tossing the salad.

Hey, I had to look that up!

Sod you. I just finished a nice meal and was dumb enough to look that up.

turbotubbs said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

From what I'm hearing the rollout of the vaccine is going to be a bit of a fiasco.

Like wot I said, logistics really do matter and the priority list should be based on wherever there are large numbers of people already -- so at the top end, no change, care homes and hospitals. But after that, look to workplaces, universities and the like, rather than go by age which means having to coordinate people living far apart to make appointments then turn up.

FWIW I think the vaccine rollout will be a success by the end of the rollout this is one of those things where the government once more are overpromising and underdelivering.

I think another driver is that the government doesn't have as many doses as it hoped, and optimism is meeting reality.

I suspect when the AZ one is approved, things will get much easier. Far easier to distribute, much more like the flu shots and very possible in community pharmacies.

MaxPB said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.

Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

Two immediate idiocies in what you have posted. We almost certainly import bananas and avocados from Belgium rather than from Israel or Ivory Coast. The EU is a vast market, so bulk imports come into a port for warehousing and then onward distribution to the final market like the UK. The Daily Mail puts these on their list because they are EU imports.

Yes we can set up direct import routes for Bananas and Avocados and Oranges and everything else that we import via the EU but it will be low volume high cost additions to the current business model and that will bang the unit price up.

As for fish, the point the Mail is making is that according to our government there is going to be major disruption to our ports. And quite frankly they're trying to educate the wazzocks who think that saving British Fishing liberates Fish and Chips.

'Yes that is a chippy. Yes those are fishing boats. No they haven't caught the cod the chippy across the road is preparing for you because Cod don't swing in these waters you dumb bastards.'

Point of order, the UK imports Cod and Haddock from Norway and Iceland outside of the scope of the EU customs union and EU quotas. We have just signed a trade deal with Norway and Iceland which allows us to continue purchasing both Cod and Haddock. Fish and chips, at least, isn't under threat.

IshmaelZ said:

rcs1000 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.


Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

(Super pedantic Smithson here: we do import some bananas from French Guyana which is technically in the EU.)

And from the Canaries.

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

RochdalePioneers said:

I did call the food plan. Mail telling patriotic Brits to not eat foreign muck like Cod or Pizza and instead enjoy Mutton, Peas, and of course that favourite dish Toast and Chips.

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/bhrenton/status/1337491722939535360

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/bhrenton/status/1337491722939535360

MaxPB said:

alex_ said:

RobD said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

You'd be okay with a free-for-all for resources within UK waters?

He's not calling for the deployment of the Navy to prevent a free for all. He's calling for a deployment to prevent anything.

I think it's fair defence of UK territory. Ultimately if they want the fish they'll have to buy it or purchase the quotas.

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

alex_ said:

RobD said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

You'd be okay with a free-for-all for resources within UK waters?

He's not calling for the deployment of the Navy to prevent a free for all. He's calling for a deployment to prevent anything.

I think it's fair defence of UK territory. Ultimately if they want the fish they'll have to buy it or purchase the quotas.

The same ones they already puirchased?

MaxPB said:

To the PB braintrust, my sister and I have inherited a property with both commercial and residential units. We'd like to sell them individually, is it possible for us to set it up as a share of freehold with each of the six units owning a share and then selling those on separately as our dad would like to buy the two commercial units but we don't want to be left managing a freeholding company and have no interest in being residential landlords. It's turning out to be such a gigantic headache. All we want to do is sell shares of freehold to 4 arm's length individual buyers and the 2 shares of freehold of the commercial property to our dad who is interested in buying them for reasons beyond my understanding.

Right now we've been told we have to set up a freeholding company and then sell the shares of that company to the buyers of create 999 year leases and keep the freeholding company. Again, we have no interest in doing that because neither of us has the wherewithal to be freeholders and run a management company, basically we want to see the back of all 6 units and be able to sell the 2 commercial properties to our dad as a share of freehold.

I fucking hate property.

Edit - all I want to know is if this is possible and which firm I can contact to get them to do it, cost isn't an issue we're happy to pay whatever it takes to achieve the stated aim up to £20k.

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

alex_ said:

RobD said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

You'd be okay with a free-for-all for resources within UK waters?

He's not calling for the deployment of the Navy to prevent a free for all. He's calling for a deployment to prevent anything.

I think it's fair defence of UK territory. Ultimately if they want the fish they'll have to buy it or purchase the quotas.

The same ones they already puirchased?

Cyclefree said:

rcs1000 said:

Malmesbury said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Much worse news for Trump today is this.

https://twitter.com/davidenrich/status/1337363827550277634

Will Donald and Hunter Biden end up sharing a cell?

Post Brexit, look to see the Deutsche Bank investigation, in the UK, restarted.

They have been a naughty bank, in a number of ways.

What's worse, they have been naughty and incompetent. If you're going to be bad, at least be bad and profitable.

Sir Desmond Glazebrook: They've broken the rules.
Sir Humphrey: What, you mean the insider trading regulations?
Sir Desmond Glazebrook: No.
Sir Humphrey: Oh. Well, that's one relief.
Sir Desmond Glazebrook: I mean of course they've broken those, but they've broken the basic, the basic rule of the City.
Sir Humphrey: I didn't know there were any.
Sir Desmond Glazebrook: Just the one. If you're incompetent you have to be honest, and if you're crooked you have to be clever. See, if you're honest, then when you make a pig's breakfast of things the chaps rally round and help you out.
Sir Humphrey: If you're crooked?
Sir Desmond Glazebrook: Well, if you're making good profits for them, chaps don't start asking questions; they're not stupid. Well, not that stupid.
Sir Humphrey: So the ideal is a firm which is honest and clever.
Sir Desmond Glazebrook: Yes. Let me know if you ever come across one, won't you.

MaxPB said:

Carnyx said:

MaxPB said:

alex_ said:

RobD said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

You'd be okay with a free-for-all for resources within UK waters?

He's not calling for the deployment of the Navy to prevent a free for all. He's calling for a deployment to prevent anything.

I think it's fair defence of UK territory. Ultimately if they want the fish they'll have to buy it or purchase the quotas.

The same ones they already puirchased?

Brexit means brexit.

nico679 said:

As for DK he’s an imbecile and just one of the many that sit on the Tory backbenches .

MaxPB said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

I'd say fish it and sell it to them but the EU has odd rules over buying fish.

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

Foxy said:

turbotubbs said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

From what I'm hearing the rollout of the vaccine is going to be a bit of a fiasco.

Like wot I said, logistics really do matter and the priority list should be based on wherever there are large numbers of people already -- so at the top end, no change, care homes and hospitals. But after that, look to workplaces, universities and the like, rather than go by age which means having to coordinate people living far apart to make appointments then turn up.

FWIW I think the vaccine rollout will be a success by the end of the rollout this is one of those things where the government once more are overpromising and underdelivering.

I think another driver is that the government doesn't have as many doses as it hoped, and optimism is meeting reality.

I suspect when the AZ one is approved, things will get much easier. Far easier to distribute, much more like the flu shots and very possible in community pharmacies.

That one is some way off. One of our virologist was talking on the subject today, on a briefing. The AZN data really is a bit of a mess.

Leicester starts with the Pfizer tommorow. I think that no vaccines will be stored in surgeries overnight, they will be kept in the hospital one. He seemed to think the Sputnik vaccine is fine BTW.

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.

If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.

MaxPB said:

Charles said:

MaxPB said:

To the PB braintrust, my sister and I have inherited a property with both commercial and residential units. We'd like to sell them individually, is it possible for us to set it up as a share of freehold with each of the six units owning a share and then selling those on separately as our dad would like to buy the two commercial units but we don't want to be left managing a freeholding company and have no interest in being residential landlords. It's turning out to be such a gigantic headache. All we want to do is sell shares of freehold to 4 arm's length individual buyers and the 2 shares of freehold of the commercial property to our dad who is interested in buying them for reasons beyond my understanding.

Right now we've been told we have to set up a freeholding company and then sell the shares of that company to the buyers of create 999 year leases and keep the freeholding company. Again, we have no interest in doing that because neither of us has the wherewithal to be freeholders and run a management company, basically we want to see the back of all 6 units and be able to sell the 2 commercial properties to our dad as a share of freehold.

I fucking hate property.

Edit - all I want to know is if this is possible and which firm I can contact to get them to do it, cost isn't an issue we're happy to pay whatever it takes to achieve the stated aim up to £20k.

You own the freehold of the whole building

Create a separate company that owns a longleasehold on the entire residential area. That company then creates individual leases to the flat owners.

When you sell the flats you also sell shares in the long leasehold company

Would you make sure as freeholder you retain ownership of permitted development rights (eg above the roof) but that the long leasehold company pays for most of the maintenance of their areas (including the roof)

That should work

I can recommend Freeths if you need a sensible legal firm

Yes, that's along the lines of what we've been recommended to do already and I have no issue with selling the shares of the freeholding company but what we really want to do is sell the actual shares of freehold and get my dad's name on the deed rather than him own a two shares in the limited company that owns the freehold. We feel that it's a better position for him to be in.

Thanks for the firm recommendation, I'll get in touch with them on Monday. My sister is lucky she's pregnant or I'd make her do it.

Pagan2 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.


Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

Except that if Brexit does block the ports then the ports will be blocked for imports from everywhere, not just the EU.

The issue is likely to be the ports facing the EU.

Mind you as we have seen the last week, blocked ports is an issue the world over right now. The US is having a massive issue with rotting food because they can't export it through their own ports.

Surely the answer then is that imports from non eu countries which we already have the wherewithal to deal with and systems get prioritised and then we have time we process the eu imports. That way no disruption for those imports from the rest of the world

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.

If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.

You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?

The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems

RochdalePioneers said:

Pagan2 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

RochdalePioneers said:

A handy guide to food post Brexit in the Daily Mail

That's a really stupid graphic. The two immediate idiocies that spring to mind are:

We don't import bananas or avocados from the EU so there is no reason for them to be affected by the type of Brexit we have. Indeed the vast majority of avocados are imported from Israel and we already have a trade deal signed with them which will reduce tariffs compared to the current EU tariffs.


Norway and Iceland are not in the EU and particularly are not in the Customs Union so do not have to abide by any EU/UK tariff regime. More to the point the UK, Iceland and Norway have already signed a deal to continue to trade in exactly the same way as they do now until a proper trade deal is concluded next year.

Except that if Brexit does block the ports then the ports will be blocked for imports from everywhere, not just the EU.

The issue is likely to be the ports facing the EU.

Mind you as we have seen the last week, blocked ports is an issue the world over right now. The US is having a massive issue with rotting food because they can't export it through their own ports.

Surely the answer then is that imports from non eu countries which we already have the wherewithal to deal with and systems get prioritised and then we have time we process the eu imports. That way no disruption for those imports from the rest of the world

And that's fine proving you are happy to pay the oncosts of direct import. Let me give you an example. My last company was buying Oats from Canada. High quality and cheap with one problem - location. Shipping transcontinental to an eastern port then trans-Atlantic isn't something you do with bit loads. You do it in bulk and that means combining orders.

Our Canadian Oats were in practice an Irish import because thats where the bulk load landed. Yes some ships will first come to Liverpool or Felixtowe. But so many land in the EU and then our part of the bulk order comes in. Putting the UK part on a separate delivery drop where the ship gets delayed as they offload our bit then carry on with the rest? Sure - if you want to pay for it.

Gallowgate said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

dixiedean said:

stodge said:

RochdalePioneers said:

From what I can see reopening the shops has been catastrophic. People shopping whilst wearing masks and distancing? Would be OK. But I've both seen and had reports from mates across the NE and those of us not wanting the pox watch agog as people swarm into shops like we haven't seen since the January sales, crush in and largely ignore at least some of the rules.

Tier 3 simply isn't enough if people can't follow the basic rules.

It now seems likely but not certain London will go into Tier 3 next week. I said back in August if we went into a second national lockdown the public would only have themselves to blame.

The "rules" aren't very difficult in all honesty and bolstered by a little common sense should be adequate so what has gone wrong? I see a lot of people with no masks almost defying the virus to make them change how they live their lives. I see it a lot among men in particular and it defies my clearly limited masculinity but it seems the thought process is "this virus can do its worst, I'll be all right, I'm just going to live as I always have".

Part of that is, I think, a reaction to the events of March and April which saw the initial fear replaced quite quickly (helped by the capriciously good weather) of a sense of frustration and resentment. As others on here have alluded, the mental health (let alone the physical and economic wellbeing) of millions was adversely affected by the confinement.

The desire for normality was and is understandable and perhaps overwhelming and in the summer we could all enjoy the outdoor life in relative safety and people don't want to go back to that spring experience and those feelings.

Even the second "lockdown" was a compromise - it was nowhere near as stringent as the first confinement and thus the case numbers haven't fallen to the levels of July and August (albeit with much improved testing to identify the cases).

The irony is a fairly permanent resolution to this is in sight - clearly we won't get 10 million vaccinated before Christmas as one or two asserted in the euphoria of the initial Pfizer announcement but we will get there over the next weeks and months.

Further to that. Did anyone answer the question are there any government figures of vaccinations per day?
Probably the most important stat going forward.

From what I'm hearing the rollout of the vaccine is going to be a bit of a fiasco.

I'm old enough to remember certain people on here saying it was all going to be a piece of piss and that we'd easily be doing 100ks a week before Christmas based on the flu vaccine procedure. Hmm.

RochdalePioneers said:

Pagan2 said:

alex_ said:

Flatlander said:

alex_ said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/donaeldunready/status/1337503342122192896

And why do we even care? What's going to happen to all these fish if the French don't get to fish them?

A big recovery of the coastal ecosystem.

If the damage trawling did was immediately visible it would have been banned years ago.

You think the message these Tory MPs are looking to sell to the fishing communities is "good news guys, we've got rid of the French, but don't get ahead of yourselves thinking you'll be able to take their place"?

The british fishing fleet will take several years to rebuild, if during that time fish stocks get a recovery period due to the lack of eu factory ships by the time its in place there will have been a significant increase in fish stocks. It is simple to work out apart from for you it seems

In those several years will there be an outward migration of all the fish currently here that we don't eat, and in inward migration of all those foreign fish we do like to eat?

Its simple to work out apparently...

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/John_Cotter/status/1337440396553707521

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1337512413374058496

Might as well be the early 1900s.