New Ipsos MORI polling finds nearly half of Brits having favourable view of Biden – politicalbetting
Options
Comments
-
Petulant?Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1352162681810268160ydoethur said:And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
0 -
So we left the EU because we said it is a unitary single power which was denying our right to self-determination; but we are now saying, by refusing to recognise its diplomats in this way, that it is not a unitary single power but a collection of sovereign nations.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
Gotit.4 -
-
He was just asked the same on R4.Scott_xP said:
It is shocking how clueless he is. He always starts interviews by reading out the prepared script that doubtless he sat up all night slowly writing out in longhand; when the interviewer manages to get him off that, he is all at sea.
Robinson did at least get him to promise that schools (and hence parents) will now get two weeks' notice of opening/closing decisions, and that he won't chop and change thereafter. If there was any confidence that he was capable of achieving this - or indeed that he is ever allowed to take such decisions himself - that would be good news.0 -
I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/0 -
Giving laptops to poorer children requires spending money - and a supply of laptops that actually doesn't seem to exist. Dell has just quoted me late March for a delivery and Lenovo are no better.ydoethur said:
Do you want to know the worst bit?alex_ said:
They should have been making contingency plans for national home learning last summer. It's scary how in so many areas over the last few years we have discovered that contingency planning (or more accurately lack of it),across large and crucial areas of government, appears to have been driven by anticipation of the world as the Government would like it to be, and not by the world as it could be if things don't go as hoped. In fact the very scenarios that contingency planning is designed for.ydoethur said:
Well, he is right. Nobody expected we would be closed because after the mass of fraud, corruption and incompetence at the DfE to deliberately conceal and falsify the true infection rates in order to keep schools open and themselves relevant that they would suddenly be forced to confront reality like this. I actually bet that regardless of the deaths it would cause, they would keep schools open - not to help children, but to save face.Scott_xP said:
And truthfully, life would be pleasanter if we were not in this situation, but since it is at least partly the aforementioned fraud corruption and incompetence at the DfE that brought us to it - insofar as if they had looked at blended learning or closed schools a fortnight early in the worst hit areas, things would not have been as bad - it’s not worth giving them a good start for effort.
People should be asking serious questions about what else the Government hasn't currently got contingency plans for, but i fear that the answers would be too horrific to be made public.
We were ordered to draw up contingency plans by local management over the summer in case of a second lockdown, and did. Then we were ordered to stop doing them by the DfE ‘because the virus isn’t spread through schools so they won’t be needed.’
That also seems to be why they stopped rolling out laptops to poorer children.
How do you spell ‘lowlifes?’
Fortunately it did mean we had a basic outline plan ready to go, as we hadn’t destroyed our work. But really...
I know a few schools have been able to source laptops for children but you then hit secondary issues of internet access and suitably quiet places for the children to study.
And that's before we remember some MPs believe the laptops would be instantly sold to get the children's parents some smack...1 -
The EU acts in four distinct ways: It both is and is not a country; and it both is and is not aiming at being a country in due course. The world divides between those who think this is clear and sensible strategy, and those who would like a bit of clarity in things. There is lots of evidence in favour of both sides. This hybrid status is one of the attractions, maybe simplistic, of Brexit and one of the compelling reasons for Remain as it allows all things to all people.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
So it is unsurprising that diplomatically the UK has reasons to act towards it as it acts towards itself, namely, without entire consistency.
On two key questions of statehood the EU cuts both ways: Currency and central bank - Yes, and working towards completion. Defence: Don't ask.
1 -
-
It does them, AIUI, through bilateral agreements with the country in question, not as of right.IanB2 said:
The fact that every other country in the entire world does differently ought to be a clue. At the least, our government knew that denying this status would create a storm, which presumably is the object.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
There is an article on it here, if you’re feeling rich:
https://brill.com/view/journals/hjd/7/1/article-p31_3.xml
If that is the case, then again the UK government is quite right to insist that they don’t have diplomatic status until such agreement is reached.
I imagine they’re also feeling a touch sensitive after the bungling of the Sacoolas case, which may have a bearing on it.2 -
Quite right.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
And, if the EU had refused to recognise UK diplomats, Scott would have cheered them on.4 -
I'm about the age mentioned. I actually failed to vote in the 2010 election which would have been my only 'win'. That said - be careful what you wish for - the Lib Dem involvement in 2010 certainly didn't meet my expectations.Foxy said:
I have voted in 10 General Elections and 2 referendums. In only 3 GE's has the party I voted for won (1997, 2001 and 2010) and neither of the referendums. In my mid fifties, I have only had a government that represents me for a fraction of my life, so yes, I understand how the young feel alienated from politics and how it doesn't represent them.tlg86 said:
Of course, this is quite selective. The same is not true for 34-42 year olds.IshmaelZ said:
I think the point is that the cohort overall has been shafted by democracy, not whether any given individual's record exactly matches that of the cohort.Omnium said:
Well, actually I was just about to post an edit to say that the "If they voted like the majority of their age group" is actually fair enough.Alistair said:
Why?Omnium said:
Not true, but if you like not true things then great.eek said:One hell of a statistic
https://twitter.com/mcash/status/1351976370264539136
Fairly easy to see why.
But suppose you vote randomly and the elections have been 50/50 then it's unlikely that as a 33 year old you'd have managed to not be with the winning side. It's even more unlikely that a 66 year old would have managed to avoid disappointment.
So it's clear that the claim is questionable. Now consider correlations - this raises the chance that a voter might have been on the winning side hugely if they've always voted one way and that side has always won. Now we know that voters pretty much vote one way, but we certainly know that one side hasn't always won.
So I suspect you will find a lot of 33 year olds that have never voted for the winning side (my guess would be around 40% - just because the Tories have won every election since 2010), but you'll find it quite hard to find 66 year olds that have always been celebrating on election night - I'd be a seller at 5%.
I’m 34 and have voted in five GEs and two UK-wide referendums. My record is:
2005 - Lost
2010 - Won
2011 - Won
2015 - Lost
2016 - Won
2017 - Lost
2019 - Won
Obviously you can argue that I did win in 2015, but it wasn’t just about Europe it was about Osbrown economics.
Personally I don’t think my generation and the next one have been shafted by democracy. We’ve been shafted by Gordon Brown, George Osborne and the Bank of England.
Otherwise a straight string of losses on referenda and general elections. I've never voted for a winning candidate either except I suppose at European elections. Hopefully it will just make the victory sweeter.
Plus - I get (vicarious?) pleasure from US elections - where the Republican alternative is generally much worse than the Conservative option here. Seeing Obama win in 2008 was great.0 -
The story of schools was that the government prefferred convienient lies over inconvienient truthydoethur said:
Do you want to know the worst bit?alex_ said:
They should have been making contingency plans for national home learning last summer. It's scary how in so many areas over the last few years we have discovered that contingency planning (or more accurately lack of it),across large and crucial areas of government, appears to have been driven by anticipation of the world as the Government would like it to be, and not by the world as it could be if things don't go as hoped. In fact the very scenarios that contingency planning is designed for.ydoethur said:
Well, he is right. Nobody expected we would be closed because after the mass of fraud, corruption and incompetence at the DfE to deliberately conceal and falsify the true infection rates in order to keep schools open and themselves relevant that they would suddenly be forced to confront reality like this. I actually bet that regardless of the deaths it would cause, they would keep schools open - not to help children, but to save face.Scott_xP said:
And truthfully, life would be pleasanter if we were not in this situation, but since it is at least partly the aforementioned fraud corruption and incompetence at the DfE that brought us to it - insofar as if they had looked at blended learning or closed schools a fortnight early in the worst hit areas, things would not have been as bad - it’s not worth giving them a good start for effort.
People should be asking serious questions about what else the Government hasn't currently got contingency plans for, but i fear that the answers would be too horrific to be made public.
We were ordered to draw up contingency plans by local management over the summer in case of a second lockdown, and did. Then we were ordered to stop doing them by the DfE ‘because the virus isn’t spread through schools so they won’t be needed.’
That also seems to be why they stopped rolling out laptops to poorer children.
How do you spell ‘lowlifes?’
Fortunately it did mean we had a basic outline plan ready to go, as we hadn’t destroyed our work. But really...4 -
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.3 -
Surely it's an either/or. Either we treat the EU as a sovereign nation - and expel all French, German, etc. diplomats, or the EU STFU.TOPPING said:
So we left the EU because we said it is a unitary single power which was denying our right to self-determination; but we are now saying, by refusing to recognise its diplomats in this way, that it is not a unitary single power but a collection of sovereign nations.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
Gotit.1 -
Also, mortgage lengths have increased substantially in that time too. At some point - perhaps many decades from now - the chickens will come home to roost.eek said:
The obvious ones would be not regulating mortgage lending (especially BTL) so house prices are sky highswing_voter said:
What is it the BOE are supposed to have done?tlg86 said:
Of course, this is quite selective. The same is not true for 34-42 year olds.IshmaelZ said:
I think the point is that the cohort overall has been shafted by democracy, not whether any given individual's record exactly matches that of the cohort.Omnium said:
Well, actually I was just about to post an edit to say that the "If they voted like the majority of their age group" is actually fair enough.Alistair said:
Why?Omnium said:
Not true, but if you like not true things then great.eek said:One hell of a statistic
https://twitter.com/mcash/status/1351976370264539136
Fairly easy to see why.
But suppose you vote randomly and the elections have been 50/50 then it's unlikely that as a 33 year old you'd have managed to not be with the winning side. It's even more unlikely that a 66 year old would have managed to avoid disappointment.
So it's clear that the claim is questionable. Now consider correlations - this raises the chance that a voter might have been on the winning side hugely if they've always voted one way and that side has always won. Now we know that voters pretty much vote one way, but we certainly know that one side hasn't always won.
So I suspect you will find a lot of 33 year olds that have never voted for the winning side (my guess would be around 40% - just because the Tories have won every election since 2010), but you'll find it quite hard to find 66 year olds that have always been celebrating on election night - I'd be a seller at 5%.
I’m 34 and have voted in five GEs and two UK-wide referendums. My record is:
2005 - Lost
2010 - Won
2011 - Won
2015 - Lost
2016 - Won
2017 - Lost
2019 - Won
Obviously you can argue that I did win in 2015, but it wasn’t just about Europe it was about Osbrown economics.
Personally I don’t think my generation and the next one have been shafted by democracy. We’ve been shafted by Gordon Brown, George Osborne and the Bank of England.
And the impact of low interest rates since 2010 on the same thing.
As we are talking about people who are 33 years old this is probably a useful statistic from https://www.money.co.uk/guides/first-time-buyers-around-the-world
Since 2007 the age of the average first time buyer in the UK has increased from 28 years old to 34 years old.
Back in 2007 your typical 33 year old would have now owned a house for 5 years, now he's still a year away from buying one.0 -
That's going to be some tough, chewy chicken....tlg86 said:At some point - perhaps many decades from now - the chickens will come home to roost.
0 -
Bloody British tourists, bringing their damn viruses with them on holiday.Floater said:0 -
To be fair to the government - there was some limited evidence suggesting children were less likely to transmit...Pulpstar said:
The story of schools was that the government prefferred convienient lies over inconvienient truthydoethur said:
Do you want to know the worst bit?alex_ said:
They should have been making contingency plans for national home learning last summer. It's scary how in so many areas over the last few years we have discovered that contingency planning (or more accurately lack of it),across large and crucial areas of government, appears to have been driven by anticipation of the world as the Government would like it to be, and not by the world as it could be if things don't go as hoped. In fact the very scenarios that contingency planning is designed for.ydoethur said:
Well, he is right. Nobody expected we would be closed because after the mass of fraud, corruption and incompetence at the DfE to deliberately conceal and falsify the true infection rates in order to keep schools open and themselves relevant that they would suddenly be forced to confront reality like this. I actually bet that regardless of the deaths it would cause, they would keep schools open - not to help children, but to save face.Scott_xP said:
And truthfully, life would be pleasanter if we were not in this situation, but since it is at least partly the aforementioned fraud corruption and incompetence at the DfE that brought us to it - insofar as if they had looked at blended learning or closed schools a fortnight early in the worst hit areas, things would not have been as bad - it’s not worth giving them a good start for effort.
People should be asking serious questions about what else the Government hasn't currently got contingency plans for, but i fear that the answers would be too horrific to be made public.
We were ordered to draw up contingency plans by local management over the summer in case of a second lockdown, and did. Then we were ordered to stop doing them by the DfE ‘because the virus isn’t spread through schools so they won’t be needed.’
That also seems to be why they stopped rolling out laptops to poorer children.
How do you spell ‘lowlifes?’
Fortunately it did mean we had a basic outline plan ready to go, as we hadn’t destroyed our work. But really...
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-11-25-COVID19-Report-37.pdf
"Overall, evidence suggests that children are less likely to transmit SARS-CoV-2 compared to adults. A
cluster-based study from Japan did not identify any children aged 0 – 19 years as a probable primary case
of a cluster [134], a national study in South Korea reported very low secondary household attack rates of
0.5% (95% CI: 0.0 – 2.6%) from paediatric index cases [135], and a prospective study in New South Wales,
Australia, similarly identified very few instances of onward transmission from a paediatric index case [136]."
0 -
It also means a lot more than just getting the laptops purchased. In many cases, the schools won’t be set up to configure and deploy them effectively, then deal with the many technical and training issues arising.eek said:
Giving laptops to poorer children requires spending money - and a supply of laptops that actually doesn't seem to exist. Dell has just quoted me late March for a delivery and Lenovo are no better.ydoethur said:
Do you want to know the worst bit?alex_ said:
They should have been making contingency plans for national home learning last summer. It's scary how in so many areas over the last few years we have discovered that contingency planning (or more accurately lack of it),across large and crucial areas of government, appears to have been driven by anticipation of the world as the Government would like it to be, and not by the world as it could be if things don't go as hoped. In fact the very scenarios that contingency planning is designed for.ydoethur said:
Well, he is right. Nobody expected we would be closed because after the mass of fraud, corruption and incompetence at the DfE to deliberately conceal and falsify the true infection rates in order to keep schools open and themselves relevant that they would suddenly be forced to confront reality like this. I actually bet that regardless of the deaths it would cause, they would keep schools open - not to help children, but to save face.Scott_xP said:
And truthfully, life would be pleasanter if we were not in this situation, but since it is at least partly the aforementioned fraud corruption and incompetence at the DfE that brought us to it - insofar as if they had looked at blended learning or closed schools a fortnight early in the worst hit areas, things would not have been as bad - it’s not worth giving them a good start for effort.
People should be asking serious questions about what else the Government hasn't currently got contingency plans for, but i fear that the answers would be too horrific to be made public.
We were ordered to draw up contingency plans by local management over the summer in case of a second lockdown, and did. Then we were ordered to stop doing them by the DfE ‘because the virus isn’t spread through schools so they won’t be needed.’
That also seems to be why they stopped rolling out laptops to poorer children.
How do you spell ‘lowlifes?’
Fortunately it did mean we had a basic outline plan ready to go, as we hadn’t destroyed our work. But really...
I know a few schools have been able to source laptops for children but you then hit secondary issues of internet access and suitably quiet places for the children to study.
And that's before we remember some MPs believe the laptops would be instantly sold to get the children's parents some smack...0 -
Yep - in a complete lack of pension saving as the money went on the more essential money pit of owning a house to live in.tlg86 said:
Also, mortgage lengths have increased substantially in that time too. At some point - perhaps many decades from now - the chickens will come home to roost.eek said:
The obvious ones would be not regulating mortgage lending (especially BTL) so house prices are sky highswing_voter said:
What is it the BOE are supposed to have done?tlg86 said:
Of course, this is quite selective. The same is not true for 34-42 year olds.IshmaelZ said:
I think the point is that the cohort overall has been shafted by democracy, not whether any given individual's record exactly matches that of the cohort.Omnium said:
Well, actually I was just about to post an edit to say that the "If they voted like the majority of their age group" is actually fair enough.Alistair said:
Why?Omnium said:
Not true, but if you like not true things then great.eek said:One hell of a statistic
https://twitter.com/mcash/status/1351976370264539136
Fairly easy to see why.
But suppose you vote randomly and the elections have been 50/50 then it's unlikely that as a 33 year old you'd have managed to not be with the winning side. It's even more unlikely that a 66 year old would have managed to avoid disappointment.
So it's clear that the claim is questionable. Now consider correlations - this raises the chance that a voter might have been on the winning side hugely if they've always voted one way and that side has always won. Now we know that voters pretty much vote one way, but we certainly know that one side hasn't always won.
So I suspect you will find a lot of 33 year olds that have never voted for the winning side (my guess would be around 40% - just because the Tories have won every election since 2010), but you'll find it quite hard to find 66 year olds that have always been celebrating on election night - I'd be a seller at 5%.
I’m 34 and have voted in five GEs and two UK-wide referendums. My record is:
2005 - Lost
2010 - Won
2011 - Won
2015 - Lost
2016 - Won
2017 - Lost
2019 - Won
Obviously you can argue that I did win in 2015, but it wasn’t just about Europe it was about Osbrown economics.
Personally I don’t think my generation and the next one have been shafted by democracy. We’ve been shafted by Gordon Brown, George Osborne and the Bank of England.
And the impact of low interest rates since 2010 on the same thing.
As we are talking about people who are 33 years old this is probably a useful statistic from https://www.money.co.uk/guides/first-time-buyers-around-the-world
Since 2007 the age of the average first time buyer in the UK has increased from 28 years old to 34 years old.
Back in 2007 your typical 33 year old would have now owned a house for 5 years, now he's still a year away from buying one.0 -
He's chosen to use the Resolute desk. If he was as anti-British as advertised I'm sure that would be firewood by now.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/0 -
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.0 -
Interesting thought. It doesn't matter normally as there's precious little difference. Nothing you'd notice for a few years other than having to live with a particular group of politicians you don't like such as '79' '83 and '87.Foxy said:
I have voted in 10 General Elections and 2 referendums. In only 3 GE's has the party I voted for won (1997, 2001 and 2010) and neither of the referendums. In my mid fifties, I have only had a government that represents me for a fraction of my life, so yes, I understand how the young feel alienated from politics and how it doesn't represent them.tlg86 said:
Of course, this is quite selective. The same is not true for 34-42 year olds.IshmaelZ said:
I think the point is that the cohort overall has been shafted by democracy, not whether any given individual's record exactly matches that of the cohort.Omnium said:
Well, actually I was just about to post an edit to say that the "If they voted like the majority of their age group" is actually fair enough.Alistair said:
Why?Omnium said:
Not true, but if you like not true things then great.eek said:One hell of a statistic
https://twitter.com/mcash/status/1351976370264539136
Fairly easy to see why.
But suppose you vote randomly and the elections have been 50/50 then it's unlikely that as a 33 year old you'd have managed to not be with the winning side. It's even more unlikely that a 66 year old would have managed to avoid disappointment.
So it's clear that the claim is questionable. Now consider correlations - this raises the chance that a voter might have been on the winning side hugely if they've always voted one way and that side has always won. Now we know that voters pretty much vote one way, but we certainly know that one side hasn't always won.
So I suspect you will find a lot of 33 year olds that have never voted for the winning side (my guess would be around 40% - just because the Tories have won every election since 2010), but you'll find it quite hard to find 66 year olds that have always been celebrating on election night - I'd be a seller at 5%.
I’m 34 and have voted in five GEs and two UK-wide referendums. My record is:
2005 - Lost
2010 - Won
2011 - Won
2015 - Lost
2016 - Won
2017 - Lost
2019 - Won
Obviously you can argue that I did win in 2015, but it wasn’t just about Europe it was about Osbrown economics.
Personally I don’t think my generation and the next one have been shafted by democracy. We’ve been shafted by Gordon Brown, George Osborne and the Bank of England.
That's what made the referendum in 2016 so disagreeable. It was a real change and one many people won't take lightly particularly as those responsible are those now in power0 -
Nah. It will get some Conservative knickers in a twist, but no one else will care.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
0 -
Yes, it's a complex and multi-layered problem. All the more reason to be tackling it systematically and consistently. It would clearly be helpful even weithout the pandemic if as many children as possible had laptop access, and internet access is less of an issue in urban areas where poverty levels are higher.Sandpit said:
It also means a lot more than just getting the laptops purchased. In many cases, the schools won’t be set up to configure and deploy them effectively, then deal with the many technical and training issues arising.eek said:
Giving laptops to poorer children requires spending money - and a supply of laptops that actually doesn't seem to exist. Dell has just quoted me late March for a delivery and Lenovo are no better.ydoethur said:
Do you want to know the worst bit?alex_ said:
They should have been making contingency plans for national home learning last summer. It's scary how in so many areas over the last few years we have discovered that contingency planning (or more accurately lack of it),across large and crucial areas of government, appears to have been driven by anticipation of the world as the Government would like it to be, and not by the world as it could be if things don't go as hoped. In fact the very scenarios that contingency planning is designed for.ydoethur said:
Well, he is right. Nobody expected we would be closed because after the mass of fraud, corruption and incompetence at the DfE to deliberately conceal and falsify the true infection rates in order to keep schools open and themselves relevant that they would suddenly be forced to confront reality like this. I actually bet that regardless of the deaths it would cause, they would keep schools open - not to help children, but to save face.Scott_xP said:
And truthfully, life would be pleasanter if we were not in this situation, but since it is at least partly the aforementioned fraud corruption and incompetence at the DfE that brought us to it - insofar as if they had looked at blended learning or closed schools a fortnight early in the worst hit areas, things would not have been as bad - it’s not worth giving them a good start for effort.
People should be asking serious questions about what else the Government hasn't currently got contingency plans for, but i fear that the answers would be too horrific to be made public.
We were ordered to draw up contingency plans by local management over the summer in case of a second lockdown, and did. Then we were ordered to stop doing them by the DfE ‘because the virus isn’t spread through schools so they won’t be needed.’
That also seems to be why they stopped rolling out laptops to poorer children.
How do you spell ‘lowlifes?’
Fortunately it did mean we had a basic outline plan ready to go, as we hadn’t destroyed our work. But really...
I know a few schools have been able to source laptops for children but you then hit secondary issues of internet access and suitably quiet places for the children to study.
And that's before we remember some MPs believe the laptops would be instantly sold to get the children's parents some smack...
1 -
It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.3 -
0
-
Hmm...interesting perspective. I am in my late 50s and I have never, ever voted for the winning candidate in my constituency. In the 80s I voted SDP/Liberal Democrat, since the 90s I have voted Tory. None has ever even come close.rkrkrk said:
I'm about the age mentioned. I actually failed to vote in the 2010 election which would have been my only 'win'. That said - be careful what you wish for - the Lib Dem involvement in 2010 certainly didn't meet my expectations.Foxy said:
I have voted in 10 General Elections and 2 referendums. In only 3 GE's has the party I voted for won (1997, 2001 and 2010) and neither of the referendums. In my mid fifties, I have only had a government that represents me for a fraction of my life, so yes, I understand how the young feel alienated from politics and how it doesn't represent them.tlg86 said:
Of course, this is quite selective. The same is not true for 34-42 year olds.IshmaelZ said:
I think the point is that the cohort overall has been shafted by democracy, not whether any given individual's record exactly matches that of the cohort.Omnium said:
Well, actually I was just about to post an edit to say that the "If they voted like the majority of their age group" is actually fair enough.Alistair said:
Why?Omnium said:
Not true, but if you like not true things then great.eek said:One hell of a statistic
https://twitter.com/mcash/status/1351976370264539136
Fairly easy to see why.
But suppose you vote randomly and the elections have been 50/50 then it's unlikely that as a 33 year old you'd have managed to not be with the winning side. It's even more unlikely that a 66 year old would have managed to avoid disappointment.
So it's clear that the claim is questionable. Now consider correlations - this raises the chance that a voter might have been on the winning side hugely if they've always voted one way and that side has always won. Now we know that voters pretty much vote one way, but we certainly know that one side hasn't always won.
So I suspect you will find a lot of 33 year olds that have never voted for the winning side (my guess would be around 40% - just because the Tories have won every election since 2010), but you'll find it quite hard to find 66 year olds that have always been celebrating on election night - I'd be a seller at 5%.
I’m 34 and have voted in five GEs and two UK-wide referendums. My record is:
2005 - Lost
2010 - Won
2011 - Won
2015 - Lost
2016 - Won
2017 - Lost
2019 - Won
Obviously you can argue that I did win in 2015, but it wasn’t just about Europe it was about Osbrown economics.
Personally I don’t think my generation and the next one have been shafted by democracy. We’ve been shafted by Gordon Brown, George Osborne and the Bank of England.
Otherwise a straight string of losses on referenda and general elections. I've never voted for a winning candidate either except I suppose at European elections. Hopefully it will just make the victory sweeter.
Plus - I get (vicarious?) pleasure from US elections - where the Republican alternative is generally much worse than the Conservative option here. Seeing Obama win in 2008 was great.
OTOH I have had a government that I voted for for the last decade and have a record of 3 from 3 on referendums. Maybe there is something in this direct government.2 -
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.0 -
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
3 -
It shouldn't do an issue unless, of cause, the other country is run by petulant toddlers.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Equally though it shows our importance (or lack thereof) in the real world and the state of the relationship between the UK and US.
A sensible person would just ignore it...0 -
All the evidence from the campaign, the speeches, the rhetoric, the videos, the ads, what Biden and Kamala have said and how they've said it. Dems in the House and Senate.. everything.eek said:
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Look, I'm pleased Trump is good too. He was an ogre, bigot, and demagogue, and needed to be evicted, but let's not deify this new administration - please.
There is a lot I think they will get badly wrong, and I am absolutely going to call them out on it.
The desire for healing and unity needs to be reflected by both the right language, actions and humility.2 -
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.0 -
The Churchill bust. It's like a little stachoo and we all know how important they are.eek said:
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.0 -
Is there anything they've done that you object to, or are you simply projecting from your fears?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
I'm still luxuriating in the relief that the twice-impeached President is gone. Everything the new administration does seems amazingly good in comparison to before. It will take a while for expectations to adjust.2 -
Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.3 -
Only if we are pathetically needy. The relationship is, I would hope, sufficiently strong that other actions can serve as suitable symbols.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Worship of Churchill to the point of being upset about a bust of him being moved is just sad more than anything else. The alliance can be marked in many other ways.
It's not whataboutism to say it doesnt matter, it's just disagreement.3 -
I agree. A "diverse" society is generally a divided one. It needs an overwhelming, external enemy to unite, which America doesn't really have at the moment.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.0 -
There will be people in Biden's team whose first reaction will have been, "let's get that racist out of here."MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.2 -
I’m happy to give them the benefit of the doubt for now, let’s see what policies actually get enacted and legislation passed in the coming months.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Most of the announcements of EOs for the first few days are normally more symbolic than effective in practice.
We’ll soon discover if he does actually intend to follow through on his pledge to unite and heal, or whether his idea of unity is that you must agree with everything we say or be ostracised from society.3 -
The campaign had to bring the vote out...Casino_Royale said:
All the evidence from the campaign, the speeches, the rhetoric, the videos, the ads, what Biden and Kamala have said and how they've said it. Dems in the House and Senate.. everything.eek said:
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Look, I'm pleased Trump is good too. He was an ogre, bigot, and demagogue, and needed to be evicted, but let's not deify this new administration - please.
There is a lot I think they will get badly wrong, and I am absolutely going to call them out on it.
The desire for healing and unity needs to be reflected by both the right language, actions and humility.
I would ignore any campaign messaging and wait to see what happens in the first 100 days in power - that will give you a more accurate picture.2 -
https://twitter.com/CER_IanBond/status/1352154880807460864IanB2 said:The fact that every other country in the entire world does differently ought to be a clue. At the least, our government knew that denying this status would create a storm, which presumably is the object.
1 -
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
On the subject of house prices:
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2021/jan/20/average-london-house-price-exceeds-500000-for-first-time-covid
In its monthly snapshot of the market – based on sales registered last November – the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed that the average price of a home in London was up by 9.7%, to a record of £514,000.
The temporary break on stamp duty, which covers homes costing up to £500,000 in England, has led to a boom in sales and pushed up prices in properties that benefit from the largest saving.
Within the capital, prices had risen most strongly in the upmarket borough of Kensington and Chelsea, which recorded annual growth of 28.6% and an average price of £1.5m.
So much for COVID dampening the London housing market.0 -
Point of order: the EU is very popular in most of its countries (62-37 on average), although not without criticisms; see Pew Research for a nuanced view:ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/03/19/europeans-credit-eu-with-promoting-peace-and-prosperity-but-say-brussels-is-out-of-touch-with-its-citizens/
- DavidL will choke on his cornflakes, but the European Parliament is popular too, though not as heavily. Contrast with, say, the US, where Congress has been hugely unpopular with voters for as long as I can recall. I'm not sure the question has been asked in Britain.0 -
Symbols can be very important. This one isn't given the closeness of the relationship, any politician bringing it up is looking for an excuse. I doubt Boris will care so long as he can get access to Biden, though hed pretend to care if he wasnt PM, as before.Dura_Ace said:
The Churchill bust. It's like a little stachoo and we all know how important they are.eek said:
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.0 -
Well, let's give up on fighting fascism, eh? 80 year old battles.....eek said:
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
No lessons for us today there.
Yes, it's a statue of some foreign guy, long dead. But given the symbolism Americans place on their flag, you'd think they might just make a space for the ultimate political symbol of standing up to The Bad Guys.0 -
I had the joys of something called Blue Jeans recently. It made Teams look good. Yesterday I spent more than half an hour trying to join Webex for an appeal and eventually did so on my phone. The novelty of these platforms is wearing a tad thin...RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
Pretty much anything else is better than Teams, the problem is that for most companies it’s included in their Office subscription and doesn’t require any money spending on purchasing and installing it.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
Depending on the main use cases, Slack, Webex, Skype, Signal or even plain old FaceTime work much better.0 -
Hmm, as an erstwhile supporter of planned firebreaks I see what you mean: you've convinced me that I was wrong. As I said the other day, that doesn't happen often! Thanks.alex_ said:
Whilst there is obviously the problem of misuse/misrepresentation, it is not inconsistent (absent actual data to the contrary) to simultaneously advance the arguments thatMysticrose said:
Don't drag me into your trope please.FrancisUrquhart said:Coronavirus cases 'DIDN'T fall during the first ten days of Lockdown 3.0': Imperial College study finds number of positive tests 'barely changed'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9168531/Coronavirus-cases-DIDNT-fall-ten-days-Englands-lockdown-major-study-claims.html
Where PB leads....we have talked about how we thought it was likely the case that the first few days of lockdown don't do anything to squashing COVID and why 2 week firebreak is flawed.
The Imperial college data is lagging behind and it's clear that lockdowns do work and so do firebreaks. In c. 3 weeks Imperial college data will catch up. There is now a clear and definite downturn in infection rates.
1) Lockdowns "work"
2) Initial days of lockdowns can generate increases in cases (and by extension argue against "firebreaks"
For two reasons.
1) the issue of behaviour outside of the lockdown. A pre-announced lockdown may lead to behaviour prior to the lockdown that contributes to increased transmission. And even without pre-announcing (in the context of a 'firebreak', there is the potential impact of adverse behaviour once the lockdown is lifted (if the lockdown period hasn't clamped down sufficiently on case numbers). It should also be noted that advocates of the "firebreak" policy were arguing for a number of scheduled short lockdowns to allow businesses to "plan" around them. Of course this makes them pre-announced and would result, not just in businesses planning around them, but also people planning their social calendar around them.
2) Potential for increased (or at least accelerated) intra household transmission in the first few days, particularly if the lockdown involves home schooling. Lockdowns result in people within households spending more time together, increasing the likelihood of transmission where one individual is entering the lockdown infected.
In the long run (and this of course depends on the extent, and is made harder by more transmissable variants), lockdowns should 'work' by ultimately preventing transmission between households. Those households which enter lockdown uninfected will exit it in the same way. Those entering it infected will burn themselves out. But this is not inconsistent with a lack of immediate short term infectiveness.0 -
Yet Zoom is a frigging security nightmare while Teams in my world just works - each to their own I suppose.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.1 -
We use Teams at the school I teach at. It works well enough for what I need, though I do need to remember to set up the calls so that my Y9s can't mute me...RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
0 -
On that score Stalin is more deserving of a place on the sideboard than WLSC.MarqueeMark said:
Well, let's give up on fighting fascism, eh? 80 year old battles.....eek said:
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
No lessons for us today there.
Yes, it's a statue of some foreign guy, long dead. But given the symbolism Americans place on their flag, you'd think they might just make a space for the ultimate political symbol of standing up to The Bad Guys.3 -
Is the European Commission popular?NickPalmer said:
Point of order: the EU is very popular in most of its countries (62-37 on average), although not without criticisms; see Pew Research for a nuanced view:ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/03/19/europeans-credit-eu-with-promoting-peace-and-prosperity-but-say-brussels-is-out-of-touch-with-its-citizens/
- DavidL will choke on his cornflakes, but the European Parliament is popular too, though not as heavily. Contrast with, say, the US, where Congress has been hugely unpopular with voters for as long as I can recall. I'm not sure the question has been asked in Britain.0 -
Glad it's above freezing unlike some recent days, but still not the warmest time to lose the heating...
Going to have to wave my wiffle stick very vigorously to stay warm.0 -
Oh dear, doesn’t sound good to lose the heating.Morris_Dancer said:Glad it's above freezing unlike some recent days, but still not the warmest time to lose the heating...
Going to have to wave my wiffle stick very vigorously to stay warm.
Enjoy playing vigorously with the wiffle stick, every good Morris dancer should do that at least twice a day!0 -
You're the IT department though! We heard all of that spiel from them too and told them to just deal with Zoom. Their job is to make it work. 🤷♂️eek said:
Yet Zoom is a frigging security nightmare while Teams in my world just works - each to their own I suppose.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though0 -
We are using Teams to run North Sea drilling operations. No hassles at all and find it easily the most stable and useable of the various systems.eek said:
Yet Zoom is a frigging security nightmare while Teams in my world just works - each to their own I suppose.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
I appreciate the whole thing is a bit complicated so it's tricky to get your head wrapped around.tlg86 said:
Surely it's an either/or. Either we treat the EU as a sovereign nation - and expel all French, German, etc. diplomats, or the EU STFU.TOPPING said:
So we left the EU because we said it is a unitary single power which was denying our right to self-determination; but we are now saying, by refusing to recognise its diplomats in this way, that it is not a unitary single power but a collection of sovereign nations.ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
Gotit.0 -
Casino_Royale said:
There will be people in Biden's team whose first reaction will have been, "let's get that racist out of here."MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
I think you need to recalibrate that remark to take account of the importance, to America, of Anglo-American relations. You are right in a way, though. Look at Biden's aggressive Irishry (it isn't obvious that you would quote Joyce on Dublin when saying farewell to Delaware), and consider the point that Churchill would on some views have invaded Ireland if he didn't think the USA would object. Then consider the point that Johnson's dire Churchill book was a crass attempt to align himself with the man. Add in what Kamala thinks about what Johnson said about Obama and his colonial past. The special relationship is an ad hoc construct 75 years past its useful life, never mind that it is surely rather circular to appeal to it in Churchillian matters?Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.0 -
Yes this is pathetic. Even it is only for etiquette reasons it is utterly childish if every other country in the world does it. And of course it gets remembered in future negotiations. When an 'i' hasn't been dotted or a 't' crossed and we have made a mistake for something that was obviously intended to be agreed it will come home an bite us.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/CER_IanBond/status/1352154880807460864IanB2 said:The fact that every other country in the entire world does differently ought to be a clue. At the least, our government knew that denying this status would create a storm, which presumably is the object.
It should be remembered that people only resort to going back to what the contract says or what was agreed in writing when things go wrong and that is why they are there.0 -
I thought that they had improved the security on zoom. For any number of participants feedback is a joy unless everyone is disciplined about the mute button.eek said:
Yet Zoom is a frigging security nightmare while Teams in my world just works - each to their own I suppose.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.0 -
I think you've been wholly captured by anti-wokeism. Did you watch yesterday? Lots of humility and decency on show, and a good celebration of modern, diverse USA. Biden will do what he says, and govern for all decent Americans. But yes, he won't pander to the EDL equivalents or neo-fascists of the far right. Because they're not decent.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Like our government, you're obsessed by symbols/statues. But it's not substance. Let me give you an example. While Jenrick puts forward legislation on statues, he does sweet FA to tackle real issues of substance, For example, tens of thousands of people are trapped in buildings with cladding that needs removing; they can't sell, and many face huge bills. Following Grenfell, how much progress has been made in resolving this? Not a lot.
Your priorities are all wrong.9 -
What do they call Zoom...sophisticated Chinese spyware.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
I love Teams.0 -
The other side of his Ledger is, er, difficult. You know, when he became The Bad Guy. What is it - 6 million deaths? Nine million?Dura_Ace said:
On that score Stalin is more deserving of a place on the sideboard than WLSC.MarqueeMark said:
Well, let's give up on fighting fascism, eh? 80 year old battles.....eek said:
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
No lessons for us today there.
Yes, it's a statue of some foreign guy, long dead. But given the symbolism Americans place on their flag, you'd think they might just make a space for the ultimate political symbol of standing up to The Bad Guys.
At least a bust of Churchill doesn't leave behind a blood-stain on the mahogony....1 -
Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though0 -
-
One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.0 -
https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1352183611848613888kjh said:Yes this is pathetic. Even it is only for etiquette reasons it is utterly childish if every other country in the world does it. And of course it gets remembered in future negotiations. When an 'i' hasn't been dotted or a 't' crossed and we have made a mistake for something that was obviously intended to be agreed it will come home an bite us.
It should be remembered that people only resort to going back to what the contract says or what was agreed in writing when things go wrong and that is why they are there.1 -
That's a bit of a stretch - without Churchill/UK the US would be under Nazi rule?MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
Does Downing Street hold a bust/portrait of Roosevelt - or Stalin? Serious question - I don't know but I imagine the former is possible but the latter rather unlikely. Without them we very likely would have been under Nazi rule.0 -
If you've been watching what the alternative to the Wokeists look like-grotesques with bazooka's slung over their shoulders-you might conclude you're pointing your venom in the wrong direction.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Or more disturbingly maybe not.0 -
Zoom does that too, in fact teams copied that feature.rkrkrk said:One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.0 -
While the Biden Presidency will be about returning to sanity in most respects, it is "woke" and will do dumb shit like this
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/13521217327236669462 -
The issue is that getting Teams to work well, really requires your company to sign up for the whole Microsoft Cloud ‘ecosystem’. If you’re only half in, which is the vast majority of SMEs, it can be a total nightmare.TOPPING said:
Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though1 -
I guess it had to happen one day. I agree with Scott.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though
And with that, I have a Teams meeting to join...0 -
Can't be Woke, it is led by Sleepy Joe.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.3 -
Ah. I see. Yes we have the full kaboodle and it is pretty good for us but I can see that any lesser version or component might be problematic.Sandpit said:
The issue is that getting Teams to work well, really requires your company to sign up for the whole Microsoft Cloud ‘ecosystem’. If you’re only half in, which is the vast majority of SMEs, it can be a total nightmare.TOPPING said:
Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though
What is the nightmare bit of it in those cases?0 -
They've moved the majority of their servers out if China aiui after pressure from the US government. The rest are set to follow in the next few months.TOPPING said:
What do they call Zoom...sophisticated Chinese spyware.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
I love Teams.
Our next big change is switching from Tableau to Looker, can't wait to get stuck into LookML!0 -
Surely the best measure of "popularity" is who can be bothered to vote for this. There had been a consistent downward trend in this, until 2019 when there was quite a large jump.NickPalmer said:
Point of order: the EU is very popular in most of its countries (62-37 on average), although not without criticisms; see Pew Research for a nuanced view:ydoethur said:
Two petulant toddlers, surely?Scott_xP said:While the adults are back in charge in America, we still have a petulant toddler in Downing Street...
https://twitter.com/patrickwintour/status/1352156166466498560
Although actually, Johnson is (for once) right about this. The EU isn’t a country and it shouldn’t be exchanging diplomats. As for their claims that the UK is a signatory to the Lisbon Treaty, in case they haven’t noticed, we’ve left and are no longer a signatory.
Moreover, the Lisbon Treaty was signed over the strenuous objections of the party currently in power, partly because of this idea that the EU should have its own foreign service, and we all know no parliament can bind its successors.
It’s the EU that are behaving like petulant toddlers here, and are in any case wrong about their status. They’re showing themselves at their pompous, stuck up, unselfaware and stupid worst, as over, say, that illegal ban on our beef.
And that’s the reason why although the EU isn’t likely to break up, it’s also never likely to be really popular.
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/03/19/europeans-credit-eu-with-promoting-peace-and-prosperity-but-say-brussels-is-out-of-touch-with-its-citizens/
- DavidL will choke on his cornflakes, but the European Parliament is popular too, though not as heavily. Contrast with, say, the US, where Congress has been hugely unpopular with voters for as long as I can recall. I'm not sure the question has been asked in Britain.
2004: 45.47%: 2009: 42.97%: 2014: 42.61%: 2019: 50.66%. 50.66% is not much to write home about but it will be interesting to see where they go from here. The absence of the UK should probably increase the average next time around.1 -
It may be a versioning thing, or it may be something on my machine, but Teams doesn't pop up a window when someone calls me. I hear the ring, but can't answer. I have to wait for them to hang up, then look in call history to find out who it was, then call them back.TOPPING said:Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.
S4B never had that problem.0 -
Except that Churchill was cheerfully complicit in all that. "If Hitler invaded hell..."MarqueeMark said:
The other side of his Ledger is, er, difficult. You know, when he became The Bad Guy. What is it - 6 million deaths? Nine million?Dura_Ace said:
On that score Stalin is more deserving of a place on the sideboard than WLSC.MarqueeMark said:
Well, let's give up on fighting fascism, eh? 80 year old battles.....eek said:
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
No lessons for us today there.
Yes, it's a statue of some foreign guy, long dead. But given the symbolism Americans place on their flag, you'd think they might just make a space for the ultimate political symbol of standing up to The Bad Guys.
At least a bust of Churchill doesn't leave behind a blood-stain on the mahogony....0 -
Listen pal, your lot (the right) voted to put a bigotted ogre in the White House.Casino_Royale said:
All the evidence from the campaign, the speeches, the rhetoric, the videos, the ads, what Biden and Kamala have said and how they've said it. Dems in the House and Senate.. everything.eek said:
What are you basing that on so far?Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.
Look, I'm pleased Trump is good too. He was an ogre, bigot, and demagogue, and needed to be evicted, but let's not deify this new administration - please.
There is a lot I think they will get badly wrong, and I am absolutely going to call them out on it.
The desire for healing and unity needs to be reflected by both the right language, actions and humility.
I appreciate it must be a disappointment for you that the candidate of the left is a thoughtful decent person but that's the way it is (indeed, that's the way it usually is).
If all you are going to be doing for the next four years is ranting about perceieved slurs from the selection of busts etc. you are going to get very boring.6 -
Yup, this is our issue, we're a GCP company, everything else we have runs on Google so integrating teams properly is a bit rubbish. If Microsoft sold Excel 365 as a separate subscription we'd do away with the rest of it too.Sandpit said:
The issue is that getting Teams to work well, really requires your company to sign up for the whole Microsoft Cloud ‘ecosystem’. If you’re only half in, which is the vast majority of SMEs, it can be a total nightmare.TOPPING said:
Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though0 -
Zoom for me shows pop-ups and shows when I got bored with a longwinded question and started reading pb.cm whilst teams doesn't. As was embarrassingly clear on a recent call. Probably there are settings that give you options.MaxPB said:
Zoom does that too, in fact teams copied that feature.rkrkrk said:One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.1 -
Sorry, but that's nonsense isn't it? All modern western societies are pretty diverse - are you saying that they need an 'overwhelming, external enemy to unite'? Who should this enemy be? If anything, those societies that are less diverse (e.g. Russia, Iran etc.) seem to be more accomplished at finding external enemies.Fishing said:
I agree. A "diverse" society is generally a divided one. It needs an overwhelming, external enemy to unite, which America doesn't really have at the moment.Casino_Royale said:It's quite clear the Democrats have been wholly captured by the Wokeists; this will be the most toe-curlingly Woke and wanky US administration there has ever been.
It will do nothing to solve America's divisions or heal them, except exacerbate them further. The only question is whether the Republicans can capitalise on it in November 2022, or whether their own fratricidal civil war will consume them, giving more space to the nutters in the Dems.
Sad.0 -
The bit that really makes it work is to have the Active Directory syncing with the Azure Cloud, then it does funky stuff with virtual proxy servers and VPN tunnels to make all your internal users see each other as if they were on the company LAN.TOPPING said:
Ah. I see. Yes we have the full kaboodle and it is pretty good for us but I can see that any lesser version or component might be problematic.Sandpit said:
The issue is that getting Teams to work well, really requires your company to sign up for the whole Microsoft Cloud ‘ecosystem’. If you’re only half in, which is the vast majority of SMEs, it can be a total nightmare.TOPPING said:
Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.Scott_xP said:
Entirely backwards.LostPassword said:President Biden is to Trump as Microsoft Teams is to Skype for Business. Be thankful that you missed out on the latter.
S4B worked. Really well. And Teams just doesn't.
Still better than Webex though
What is the nightmare bit of it in those cases?
The difficult bits are random error messages when trying to have people from different organisations on the same call, and bandwidth/latency issues at their server end.1 -
He didn't say he would become the devil. Stalin did become it.IshmaelZ said:
Except that Churchill was cheerfully complicit in all that. "If Hitler invaded hell..."MarqueeMark said:
The other side of his Ledger is, er, difficult. You know, when he became The Bad Guy. What is it - 6 million deaths? Nine million?Dura_Ace said:
On that score Stalin is more deserving of a place on the sideboard than WLSC.MarqueeMark said:
Well, let's give up on fighting fascism, eh? 80 year old battles.....eek said:
80 year old battles.MarqueeMark said:
Wouldn't have been any busts of civil rights leaders if we hadn't put everything on the line to defeat Hitler. Churchill is the ultimate singular embodiment of that. For that reason alone, his bust deserves his place in that company.Casino_Royale said:
All the apologising and the whataboutism doesn't matter. Churchill is a symbol (*THE* symbol) of the transatlantic alliance.eek said:
I'm sorry but only a complete idiot believes decorations have to sit in the same place all the time. the choice of busts (Martin Luther King Jr, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks, Eleanor Roosevelt and Cesar Chavez) seems very appropriate for an 21st century American president.Casino_Royale said:I see Biden has already committed a hostile act:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/01/21/winston-churchill-bust-not-display-joe-bidens-oval-office/
Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all point to the work that is still required to make America an equal place.
Moving it out - without explaining why or where, and acknowledging the sheer importance of the man in Anglo-American relations - is going to have political implications.
Try pursuing a Woke agenda under Nazism. Might have - briefly - discovered slavery wasn't just an historical stain to be cleansed.
No lessons for us today there.
Yes, it's a statue of some foreign guy, long dead. But given the symbolism Americans place on their flag, you'd think they might just make a space for the ultimate political symbol of standing up to The Bad Guys.
At least a bust of Churchill doesn't leave behind a blood-stain on the mahogony....0 -
Yurgh. That is gruesome.Scott_xP said:
It may be a versioning thing, or it may be something on my machine, but Teams doesn't pop up a window when someone calls me. I hear the ring, but can't answer. I have to wait for them to hang up, then look in call history to find out who it was, then call them back.TOPPING said:Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.
S4B never had that problem.0 -
Rather glad I retired just as the age of voice conference calls gave way to video conference calls. Voice conferencing gave you so much more freedom to get on with other work stuff (or non-work stuff) during long boring calls.rkrkrk said:
Zoom for me shows pop-ups and shows when I got bored with a longwinded question and started reading pb.cm whilst teams doesn't. As was embarrassingly clear on a recent call. Probably there are settings that give you options.MaxPB said:
Zoom does that too, in fact teams copied that feature.rkrkrk said:One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.0 -
When you share your screen zoom gives you an option of which screen you want to share it if you want to share the whole desktop. I usually only share the presentation screen so any other notifications or if I switch to another screen for slack etc... doesn't get on screen.rkrkrk said:
Zoom for me shows pop-ups and shows when I got bored with a longwinded question and started reading pb.cm whilst teams doesn't. As was embarrassingly clear on a recent call. Probably there are settings that give you options.MaxPB said:
Zoom does that too, in fact teams copied that feature.rkrkrk said:One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.0 -
Trans in sport is an impossible problem.Scott_xP said:While the Biden Presidency will be about returning to sanity in most respects, it is "woke" and will do dumb shit like this
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
I get frustrated with both sides on the issue of men/women/trans. Just treat people as people. I don't give a toss what you are.
And that works for just about everything, except women's sport.
Except for a few specific sports the physical difference is important and the solution can't be to just treat everyone as equal as otherwise half the population has been removed from competitive sport. Yet that still leaves the trans issue.
I don't know what the answer is.10 -
A young lady I was working with yesterday had never seen a boardroom spider phone before, didn’t comprehend that we’d ever do conference calls without video!Benpointer said:
Rather glad I retired just as the age of voice conference calls gave way to video conference calls. Voice conferencing gave you so much more freedom to get on with other work stuff (or non-work stuff) during long boring calls.rkrkrk said:
Zoom for me shows pop-ups and shows when I got bored with a longwinded question and started reading pb.cm whilst teams doesn't. As was embarrassingly clear on a recent call. Probably there are settings that give you options.MaxPB said:
Zoom does that too, in fact teams copied that feature.rkrkrk said:One key thing to remember is Teams share screen function only shares what you told it to originally.
So if you change your screen - everyone will stay watching what you had displayed before.
Zoom follows you round and shows whatever pop-up notifications you have to everyone.0 -
Then try having a meeting with loads of outside clients at once with loads of people on and off the VPN with teams. That's why we went back to Zoom, it was just embarrassing for our meetings to not work properly for clients.TOPPING said:
Yurgh. That is gruesome.Scott_xP said:
It may be a versioning thing, or it may be something on my machine, but Teams doesn't pop up a window when someone calls me. I hear the ring, but can't answer. I have to wait for them to hang up, then look in call history to find out who it was, then call them back.TOPPING said:Teams is the god of online meetings. So simple, can't think of a failing OTTOMH.
S4B never had that problem.0 -
They might have done - but the tricks they used to pull to ensure installation are such that on a corporate level I won't allow that software on the network.DavidL said:
I thought that they had improved the security on zoom. For any number of participants feedback is a joy unless everyone is disciplined about the mute button.eek said:
Yet Zoom is a frigging security nightmare while Teams in my world just works - each to their own I suppose.MaxPB said:
Teams is the worst. Our IT department tried to foist it on us in the first lockdown because it's free but they decided that the subscription cost for Zoom was worth it to avoid the bitching.RochdalePioneers said:Entirely off-topic, but later this morning I have several back to back video meetings. One is an invite to Teams
*shudder*
Why is it that everything Microsoft is as complex and user-unfriendly as possible? I don't to integrate into your sodding hell, just let me connect to this meeting that someone else is hosting so that I can then go back to using platforms that actually work.
If you need to use Zoom I'll lend you an iPad...1 -
Morning all. And a fine bright, if cold, one it is too.
I do quite a few virtual u3a meetings and they're all Zoom; the only problem seems to be the 40 minute limit for meetings and it's quite easy to get round that.
WEA uses Zoom too, plus something called Canvas for feedback and background reading. The Zoom works fine, but the Canvas is a bit clunky.
One of my sons tried Teams for business, but I don't think either he or his company were very pleased with it.
Never tried Skype for Business; with how many can you have a meeting?
I think Zoom has caught the public imagination and the inventor and his (?) backers must now be rolling it it!0 -
Churchill was almost the facilitator of a liberated Ireland. He offered the 6 countries to de Valera if the Republic would join the allies in WW2. Unsurprisingly and probably accurately, de Valera didn't trust Churchill to deliver on his end of the bargain and said no.IshmaelZ said:You are right in a way, though. Look at Biden's aggressive Irishry (it isn't obvious that you would quote Joyce on Dublin when saying farewell to Delaware), and consider the point that Churchill would on some views have invaded Ireland if he didn't think the USA would object.
0 -
Treat everyone as equal and with respect. Trans women should be able to understand that they are to be treated in general as women despite being biologically male, but for the purposes of sport biology matters. So they can be recognised as women but in doing so would become ineligible for sport - in the same way someone doping is. Its not doping, but its the same biological effect.kjh said:
Trans in sport is an impossible problem.Scott_xP said:While the Biden Presidency will be about returning to sanity in most respects, it is "woke" and will do dumb shit like this
https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1352121732723666946
I get frustrated with both sides on the issue of men/women/trans. Just treat people as people. I don't give a toss what you are.
And that works for just about everything, except women's sport.
Except for a few specific sports the physical difference is important and the solution can't be to just treat everyone as equal as otherwise half the population has been removed from competitive sport. Yet that still leaves the trans issue.
I don't know what the answer is.
I don't see why that is unreasonable?4 -
I agree that this is childish and self defeating. We need to smooth the practicalities of the deal done with the EU and that is going to require a lot of cooperation and goodwill. Its always a bit frustrating when people just won't accept that they have won. We need to move on to a more friendly and mature relationship than we had as members (not a particularly high bar). This is not a step in that direction.Scott_xP said:
https://twitter.com/BBCJLandale/status/1352183611848613888kjh said:Yes this is pathetic. Even it is only for etiquette reasons it is utterly childish if every other country in the world does it. And of course it gets remembered in future negotiations. When an 'i' hasn't been dotted or a 't' crossed and we have made a mistake for something that was obviously intended to be agreed it will come home an bite us.
It should be remembered that people only resort to going back to what the contract says or what was agreed in writing when things go wrong and that is why they are there.
1
This discussion has been closed.