Boris Johnson’s opposition to Indyref2 might be as Herculean as his opposition to a border in the Ir

DavidL said:

Theuniondivvie said:

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1384566601853415426?s=20
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1384829546596294656?s=20

Well well, this is quite a significant correction. Three months' worth of independence polling from Savanta/ComRes came out unweighted instead of weighted. Actual support for independence was lower than quoted

Dec 2020 was reported as 52% pro-independence, but was actually 49%.
Jan 2021 reported as 51%, actually 47%.
Feb 2021 reported as 47%, actually 43%.
These are narrative-changing differences.

Yep, those pushing the 'narrative' of the wheels have come off the indy juggernaut and support for indy takes massive drop during the Salmond enquiry must feel a bit embarrassed. They may of course also feel embarrassed for other reasons.

LoL. 5/5 for effort but the content....

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

Scott_xP said:

The lessons of the text exchange between Boris Johnson & James Dyson:

If you're a Tory donor, with the PM's personal number, you can get what you want fixed

If you're anyone else, PPE supplier, @ExcludedUK, @ForgottedLtd, you're ignored

That's #Torysleaze

Me on @SkyNews https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1384846163799678978/video/1

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I develop software - if I need something done quickly I either pick the real expert if he is available as he knows the internals and can do it in hours or someone else who would take days.

If you need something done quickly because other things depend on X you get the real expert to do it and you move other projects to make him available.

Pulpstar said:

https://www.landc.co.uk/calculators/house-price-calculator/ how accurate do others think this is for their house ?

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I develop software - if I need something done quickly I either pick the real expert if he is available as he knows the internals and can do it in hours or someone else who would take days.

If you need something done quickly because other things depend on X you get the real expert to do it and you move other projects to make him available.

Nobody in Dyson is a "real expert at manufacturing ventilators" because they don't make ventilators.

Nope but there will be the go to person for X and the go to person for Y. And when you want things done NOW you want those people working together.

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

You still haven't shown the tax exemption was necessary so you've still conceded my point.

Until shown otherwise, it was simply a favour to a mate.

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

You still haven't shown the tax exemption was necessary so you've still conceded my point.

Until shown otherwise, it was simply a favour to a mate.

It was necessary, the engineers who didn't live in the country needed it to not have a windfall tax placed on them purely for working on a not-for-profit emergency the government was begging them to work on.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

To be honest the Dyson issue is becoming tedious now

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

glw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

Give it a few months and the usual suspects will be attacking the vaccine programme on the grounds of cost, over-ordering, wasted vaccines, cronyism etc. The tens of thousands of lives saved won't be mentioned.

ping said:

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-9495039/House-prices-20k-year-number-transactions-DOUBLED.html

Interesting the mail comments are universally negative. I think the govt may have more latitude to act on the housing bubble than they think they do.

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

You still haven't shown the tax exemption was necessary so you've still conceded my point.

Until shown otherwise, it was simply a favour to a mate.

It was necessary, the engineers who didn't live in the country needed it to not have a windfall tax placed on them purely for working on a not-for-profit emergency the government was begging them to work on.

No. It was only "necessary" if they would not have come otherwise.

If they would have come regardless of the tax implications, then it was by definition "not necessary".

It is at that point, simply a courtesy.

Do you have any proof they would have come regardless?

Otherwise its a nonsense.

gealbhan said:

CursingStone said:

Scott_xP said:

The lessons of the text exchange between Boris Johnson & James Dyson:

If you're a Tory donor, with the PM's personal number, you can get what you want fixed

If you're anyone else, PPE supplier, @ExcludedUK, @ForgottedLtd, you're ignored

That's #Torysleaze

Me on @SkyNews https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1384846163799678978/video/1

Except this isnt true. Though access is important and Boris should be more wary about getting involved. Dyson got a standard response from the Chancellor. The PPE supplier got sent to the dept health website and @excludeduk need to think more carefully about low balling their tax declarations to hmrc in future if they expect money back.

What I took from it, Dyson would not take the First Lord Of Treasury on his word, he wanted what he was verbally promised in writing.

Quite funny really 😀

glw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

Give it a few months and the usual suspects will be attacking the vaccine programme on the grounds of cost, over-ordering, wasted vaccines, cronyism etc. The tens of thousands of lives saved won't be mentioned.

OldKingCole said:

kjh said:

MattW said:

2nd AZ Jab successful.

This time it was a leisure centre manager and a lifeguard.

Both of whom said it was more interesting than their normal jobs as they get to meet more interesting people.

Centre still running at 1000 people per day.

It took 2 people to hold the syringe; that must have been one hell of a jab.

One to load, one to inject? Not unusual. Or standby.

Charles said:

IanB2 said:

another_richard said:

So the Boris haters are obsessing about another irrelevance.

While continuing to ignore the huge open goal of border control.

Truly Boris is fortunate in the incompetent derangement of those who hate him.

2,500 people incoming from India, just today

You are assuming all the planes are full?

Scott_xP said:

“Who is the real Boris Johnson?”

In 2005, he said allowing the sale of Manchester United was “basic Conservative philosophy”

Now he says “billionaire club owners” are “dislocating” football from communities

#PoliticsLive https://bbc.in/3xnR9x8 https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1384849725451538435/video/1

IshmaelZ said:

ping said:

TimT said:

The situation in India is scary: https://www.ft.com/content/683914a3-134f-40b6-989b-21e0ba1dc403

Worth reading.

For those without an ft sub,

Copy the link into google and click through.

Holy fuck. Most frightening single article i have read in the past 12 months.

The rate of ICU patients in Nagpur at 353 per million is higher than it was anywhere in Europe during the pandemic. Mumbai, the financial capital, has 194 ICU patients per million.

...

A Financial Times analysis also points to under-reporting of deaths. Local news reports for seven districts across the states of Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar show that while at least 1,833 people are known to have died of Covid-19 in recent days, based mainly on cremations, only 228 have been officially reported. 

...

“The condition is so horrible that so many people are dying on the street, in their houses, before they can see a doctor or even have a test."

williamglenn said:

Juventus chairman Andrea Agnelli has claimed Boris Johnson forced the collapse of the Super League as he feared it would undermine Brexit.

Gallowgate said:

glw said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

Give it a few months and the usual suspects will be attacking the vaccine programme on the grounds of cost, over-ordering, wasted vaccines, cronyism etc. The tens of thousands of lives saved won't be mentioned.

Oh do give it a rest. If we had poured a significant amount of taxpayers money into a vaccine manufactured by one of Boris's mates, with no record in the area, off the back of a text message that turned out didn't work, then maybe there would be an argument.

Otherwise they are not comparable in the slightest.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I find it totally bizarre how to this day we have such terrible signal on train lines. As a state-owned company NR should be forced to allow citing of masts wherever they are needed.

CarlottaVance said:

https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1384566601853415426?s=20
https://twitter.com/dhothersall/status/1384829546596294656?s=20

Well well, this is quite a significant correction. Three months' worth of independence polling from Savanta/ComRes came out unweighted instead of weighted. Actual support for independence was lower than quoted

Dec 2020 was reported as 52% pro-independence, but was actually 49%.
Jan 2021 reported as 51%, actually 47%.
Feb 2021 reported as 47%, actually 43%.
These are narrative-changing differences.

ping said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I find it totally bizarre how to this day we have such terrible signal on train lines. As a state-owned company NR should be forced to allow citing of masts wherever they are needed.

I expect that problem will be solved in the next couple of years, with satellite internet.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

ping said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I find it totally bizarre how to this day we have such terrible signal on train lines. As a state-owned company NR should be forced to allow citing of masts wherever they are needed.

I expect that problem will be solved in the next couple of years, with satellite internet.

How does satellite internet help improve 4G and 5G connectivity? As backhaul yes but to actually provide the signal you need physical infrastructure on the ground.

ridaligo said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

eek said:

Gallowgate said:

Scott_xP said:

Gallowgate said:

So it is a fiction. Glad we got there in the end.

Did any of the other manufacturers require the same tax exemption Dyson asked for?

There's your answer...

Yup.

Not quite -the question should be:-

Did any other manufacturer wish / need to bring particular individuals into the UK and so asked for the same tax exemption?

That actually is the question..

No, the question is, would particular individuals have come to the UK anyway and this was just a favour to a mate, or was it a condition.

That's a very different question which is well beyond my nuanced version of Scott_xP?

Scott_xP missed out (probably intentionally) the fact that none of the other companies trying to help wished to bring named individuals to help with the project.

Let's make it really simple - I'm running the Manhatten Project to build the nuclear bomb. Should I insist on getting Oppenheimer, Manley and Serber working on it or would three random physicists elsewhere do just as well

But this isn't the Manhattan project. You like to throw the "lawyer" card at me but I'm much more experienced at manufacturing than I am at law.

Manufacturing a widget is manufacturing a widget. You don't need named specialists, you just need specialists, and there's thousands of expert manufacturing engineers around the world, and plenty within Dyson itself I assume, probably both in the UK and in Singapore.

When I've been asked to go to clients to solve problems, we don't send the entire team, we send who's available or who's willing.

I note that whoever they sent, if they did, didn't manage to produce anything anyway?

That was the Manhattan Project of our time.

Manufacturing something that you're already doing and have no issues with may need "just anyone" but when you're trying to get going at speed on a project to save tens of thousands of lives, with a product you've never made before, you need the best named people. Not just anyone. This isn't a widget.

Your suggestion is like saying that in a murder trial you don't need a QC, a newly qualified paralegal will do.

If anything it was the German equivalent because it failed miserably. Great showing for Boris's mates.

The fact is you still haven't shown that these specialist "named people" would have refused to help if there was no tax exemption.

Therefore you still haven't shown the tax exemption was required. You've merely demonstrated why they have may preferred it — of course they would have preferred it, who wouldn't?

You need a QC but you don't need a named specific QC. All are more than qualified for the job.

It didn't fail miserably. Mercedes and others succeeded. Mission accomplished.

That was the point, like the vaccine taskforce backing half a dozen vaccines. You don't back one, you back any that might succeed in the hope you get one that does.

You still haven't shown the tax exemption was necessary so you've still conceded my point.

Until shown otherwise, it was simply a favour to a mate.

It was necessary, the engineers who didn't live in the country needed it to not have a windfall tax placed on them purely for working on a not-for-profit emergency the government was begging them to work on.

No. It was only "necessary" if they would not have come otherwise.

If they would have come regardless of the tax implications, then it was by definition "not necessary".

It is at that point, simply a courtesy.

Do you have any proof they would have come regardless?

Otherwise its a nonsense.

You're the one asserting that they wouldn't have come!

I've been asking for evidence of that all morning.

Gallowgate, you don't seem to know anything about what's involved with ex-pat taxation. Philip has been very patient in trying to explain it to you. Believe me, ex-pat taxation is an absolute nightmare ... no matter how much an engineer might want to come back to the UK and help get a ventilator production line up and running for Dyson he is not going to want to open himself up to potentially years of tax liability by breaking the 90 rule. And, as for grossing up, Dyson cannot know each employee's personal finances so cannot possibly know how much compensation he might be liable for, not to mention the bureaucracy and cost involved in filing international tax returns for years to come. As has been explained, there is no loss to the treasury because if they didn't grant an exemption the employee wouldn't come.

Dyson asked the right question in his employees' interests and Boris gave the right answer in the country's interests. Anyone criticizing this is either ignorant of the technicalities or willfully misrepresenting the facts.

TimT said:

The situation in India is scary: https://www.ft.com/content/683914a3-134f-40b6-989b-21e0ba1dc403

CorrectHorseBattery said:

I find it totally bizarre how to this day we have such terrible signal on train lines. As a state-owned company NR should be forced to allow citing of masts wherever they are needed.

AlistairM said:

457,649 new vaccinations registered in 🇬🇧 today

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 84,871 1st doses / 272,929 2nd doses
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 2,523 / 50,388
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 13,280 / 11,631
NI 6,948 / 15,079

Up from 388K last week. Could be some 700K days later on this week. As someone in the 40-44 age group waiting for my vaccination I am checking the book a vaccine site daily now in anticipation of it opening up.

Morris_Dancer said:

That Juventus quote is perfect for the PM.

CorrectHorseBattery said:

HYUFD said:

Scott_xP said:

“Who is the real Boris Johnson?”

In 2005, he said allowing the sale of Manchester United was “basic Conservative philosophy”

Now he says “billionaire club owners” are “dislocating” football from communities

#PoliticsLive https://bbc.in/3xnR9x8 https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1384849725451538435/video/1

Boris changes his ideology according to what he needs to do to win an election, in 2005 he was appealing to rich Londoners to win the 2008 Mayoralty and his constituency was in Henley in the wealthy south which is more rowing and regattas than soccer.

Now his base as Tory leader and PM is white working class football loving Leavers, a lot of whom live in the North of England.

Hence too 2021 Boris is basically a Brexiteer social democrat, while 2005 Boris was a free marketeer who still supported staying in the EU

He’s a phenomenal political person but he has absolutely no principles whatsoever.

Cookie said:

AlistairM said:

457,649 new vaccinations registered in 🇬🇧 today

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 84,871 1st doses / 272,929 2nd doses
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 2,523 / 50,388
🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 13,280 / 11,631
NI 6,948 / 15,079

Up from 388K last week. Could be some 700K days later on this week. As someone in the 40-44 age group waiting for my vaccination I am checking the book a vaccine site daily now in anticipation of it opening up.

Next day or two, I reckon.
Being in the bracket above, I know no-one in the 45-50 bracket who hasn't at least got a jab booked (I recognise the dangers of generalising from my own bubble!).