"Former ECB chief economists warn of eurozone debt trap if inflation comes back The central bank may no longer be free to tighten policy if needed, they argue."
Rising inflation wiping out the Eurozone's debts would probably be the best thing that could happen to them.
Rising inflation would probably open up an entirely different set of issues for Germany - given that the central focus of the Bundesbank is (and always has been) to keep inflation as low as possible.
Rising inflation is, for Germans I think, up there with The Famine for the Irish.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
Up North I have a nephew who, at 18, instead of going to Uni went to work in a large, traditional, British bank. One of his co-workers introduced him to Bitcoin and before long he had made enough to buy, outright, a terraced house which he and his father redecorated.
Yep - some people have got very rich from its ludicrous spikes in value. Others have lost a significant portion of their investment from its ludicrous spikes in value. I don't get it...
IIRC, Robert said on here that he lost $10k on cryto-currency the old-fashioned way, by outright fraud? Ended up waiting for a check (or whatever) supposedly in the web that strangely never arrived.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 4h 11. So yes, take the breakdown of patients by vax status in Bolton hospital as a sign that vaccines are protective against severe illness.
But do not think that this makes everything "fine" cos it doesn't. /END
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp Replying to @chrischirp PS to the heartless argument that unvaxxed people are to blame if they don't get vaxxed... 1) full hospitals are full hospitals 2) SAGE models suggest most deaths are in vaxxed people in a bad surge 3) dividing people in "deserving" and "undeserving" is wrong and dangerous.
She is rather missing the point with that "deserving / undeserving" dichotomy.
The lockdowns were imposed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying in unacceptably large numbers. Now with the vaccination programme there is no risk of the former or the latter happening, so there is no good reason to continue with lockdowns or continuing restrictions.
A separate question is whether the unvaxxed should get treatment if they get Covid as a result of their refusal to take the vaccine when offered. My view is yes - medical care should be provided on the basis of medical need not on the basis of whether someone has behaved stupidly or not.
Whether others will blame the unvaxxed for their stupidity is another matter. If people behave stupidly, they should not complain if others blame them, especially if they put others at risk.
I completely agree with this analysis Cyclefree. No, we shouldn't slow the roadmap to protect antivaxxers. Yes, antivaxxers should be given full care at no extra cost should they become ill from Covid.
This is a complete straw man. Can you produce a single 'anti-vaxxer' who wants you to slow down the roadmap? Most want it speeded up. Most never wanted lockdown in the first place.
Some people are comfortable living with risk.
Its not the anti-vaxxers who want it slowed, its some the scientists who want it slowed to protect the anti-vaxxers.
Read the sentence you wrote and ask yourself if its true in any sense whatever.
As we learn more about SAGE, we surely understand the faith in it displayed on here and elsewhere is utterly misplaced.
Other than being poorly typed I believe it in its entirety. Which bit do you disagree with?
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
Up North I have a nephew who, at 18, instead of going to Uni went to work in a large, traditional, British bank. One of his co-workers introduced him to Bitcoin and before long he had made enough to buy, outright, a terraced house which he and his father redecorated.
Yep - some people have got very rich from its ludicrous spikes in value. Others have lost a significant portion of their investment from its ludicrous spikes in value. I don't get it...
IIRC, Robert said on here that he lost $10k on cryto-currency the old-fashioned way, by outright fraud? Ended up waiting for a check (or whatever) supposedly in the web that strangely never arrived.
I wonder how many people who think they've made a fortune on crypto will find there's nothing there when they go to cash it out? 😕
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
A case in point.
Have you considered that SAGE is not the body you think it is and does not deserve the credit you ascribe to it?
Have you considered that no humans, including scientists, are immune from being intoxicated by power and control over their fellow humans?
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
Tim Spector @timspector · 1h Worried about the Indian variant? While our latest ZOE data still shows hotspots in Bolton Bedford, Oldham and Glasgow where the variant exists- the UK picture is not showing any signs of an increase with cases staying at around 2000 symptomatic cases per day which is v.low. Thx
BTW fpt misogyny feels too weak a word for threatening women with rape. When I hear the word "misogyny" I think of someone believing women are too stupid to be doctors or should just be in the kitchen or are not strong enough to be CEO's or whatever.
Threatening rape is of a whole different order. It is sadism directed at women.
To me, the inference is that the thugs waving Palestinian flags saw women as incidental to the process. It wasn't "rape the women," it was "rape their daughters" - a threat aimed at Jewish men. Because these people are from a different and pretty alien culture - family honour is rated highly; individual rights are rated lowly. And what individual women think about it is valued not at all.
Let's be accurate: the threat was aimed at women in order to dishonour men. It is women who suffer mentally and physically when they are raped. Whatever offence a man suffers is as nothing to what women suffer.
These particular men may have a different culture. But rape as a weapon is and has been used by men of all cultures, including by so-called civilised ones. This is not only a Muslim issue.
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
All currencies are essentially a matter of belief that you can use them for future goods and services. Yes gold has an intrinsic value as a decorative item of jewellery but that is nothing like £1300 per ounce. It is that price because people believe that others will swap it with them based on thousands of years of gold trade.
Cryptos are popular because enough people believe that others will swap it with them in the future because they think the technology/structure of the currency is better (whether it is or not, enough people believe that). So there is a different belief behind them compared to gold, but it is all just about belief, currencies dont have intrinsic value to match their price.
Lets focus on that word "belief". Precious Metals have intrinsic value hence their use as money for millenia. Fiat currency has representative value - a £10 note may cost a few pence to produce but will buy £10 of goods / pay £10 of taxes because government.
Bitcoin et al have value because some people who believe in Bitcoin have declared it has value. It isn't a currency. It is a religion - one of the cultey ones.
In India in 2016 the govt said all the big banknotes in circulation would be illegal. They gave four hours notice. If the value of gold had anything to do with intrinsic value it would be a fraction of its current price.
I am not saying bitcoin is good value (or not) but you are misunderstanding how currencies are formed.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
A case in point.
Have you considered that SAGE is not the body you think it is and does not deserve the credit you ascribe to it?
Have you considered that no humans, including scientists, are immune from being intoxicated by power and control over their fellow humans?
Qualifications do not confer morality.
I never have, I think you've missed my many, many rants at how shit SAGE have been at this over the last year. I know nothing about epidemiology, but I do know about data modelling and I've done an overall better job.
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
Constant cave ins to SAGE is a funny way of saying "completely ignored their advice in September costing the lives of tens of thousands of people" .
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 4h 11. So yes, take the breakdown of patients by vax status in Bolton hospital as a sign that vaccines are protective against severe illness.
But do not think that this makes everything "fine" cos it doesn't. /END
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp Replying to @chrischirp PS to the heartless argument that unvaxxed people are to blame if they don't get vaxxed... 1) full hospitals are full hospitals 2) SAGE models suggest most deaths are in vaxxed people in a bad surge 3) dividing people in "deserving" and "undeserving" is wrong and dangerous.
She is rather missing the point with that "deserving / undeserving" dichotomy.
The lockdowns were imposed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying in unacceptably large numbers. Now with the vaccination programme there is no risk of the former or the latter happening, so there is no good reason to continue with lockdowns or continuing restrictions.
A separate question is whether the unvaxxed should get treatment if they get Covid as a result of their refusal to take the vaccine when offered. My view is yes - medical care should be provided on the basis of medical need not on the basis of whether someone has behaved stupidly or not.
Whether others will blame the unvaxxed for their stupidity is another matter. If people behave stupidly, they should not complain if others blame them, especially if they put others at risk.
I completely agree with this analysis Cyclefree. No, we shouldn't slow the roadmap to protect antivaxxers. Yes, antivaxxers should be given full care at no extra cost should they become ill from Covid.
This is a complete straw man. Can you produce a single 'anti-vaxxer' who wants you to slow down the roadmap? Most want it speeded up. Most never wanted lockdown in the first place.
Some people are comfortable living with risk.
Its not the anti-vaxxers who want it slowed, its some the scientists who want it slowed to protect the anti-vaxxers.
Read the sentence you wrote and ask yourself if its true in any sense whatever.
As we learn more about SAGE, we surely understand the faith in it displayed on here and elsewhere is utterly misplaced.
Other than being poorly typed I believe it in its entirety. Which bit do you disagree with?
I disagree that SAGE want to protect anti-vaxxers. They want to protect the unaccountable power they have been given over the people of Britain.
They are against the end of lockdown because of the massive diminution in their power that it entails.
Their desperate attempt to stop even the May 17 loosening via some ludicrous forecasting surely shows us that.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I find it very easy to understand. The scientists are no doubt great scientists. But they have a single focus and who could blame them for that; it's what the government asked of them.
City analysts, meanwhile, are used to forensically sifting through the data to understand patterns, meanings, and peculiarities and thereby create models and forecasts. They are not bounded by anything except an enquiring mind.
Doesn't surprise me at all that they should have been able to do this.
And as I have said from Day One - if you put the CMO, CSO and Boris on screen every day talking about mountaineering, pretty soon mountaineering would be banned.
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
I think it's an Emperor's clothes thing. But as I've said I'm a very poor judge here.
Economists are much like Alchemists at this point. Very wise undoubtedly, but plain wrong in at least some big ways too. I'm probably mostly of the latter (I'm not an economist anyway).
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
Up North I have a nephew who, at 18, instead of going to Uni went to work in a large, traditional, British bank. One of his co-workers introduced him to Bitcoin and before long he had made enough to buy, outright, a terraced house which he and his father redecorated.
Yep - some people have got very rich from its ludicrous spikes in value. Others have lost a significant portion of their investment from its ludicrous spikes in value. I don't get it...
Summon the ghost of Charlie Ponzi he'll be happy to explain it all. Along with his latest new exciting can't-miss investment opportunity!
And as I have said from Day One - if you put the CMO, CSO and Boris on screen every day talking about mountaineering, pretty soon mountaineering would be banned.
We might have stood more chance of banning flights to the Alps last winter...
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
Is that even a theory? So far as I can see economists have given up on theory. They've lit the blue touchpaper, stood well back, but no way are they going back to the firework.
Personally I think that a line needs to be drawn under this QE phase as quickly as possible and no matter the temptation it shouldn't be used again.
The economic climate is so weird at the moment.
A couple of straws in the wind. My sister, who works in a dubious part of financial services, asked me last week whether I wanted to invest in a new coin that is launching next week.
On Facebook this morning, someone I know was telling people not to sell bitcoin and that now was a good time to buy etc. etc.
It's all going to end in tears.
I'm sure you're right.
I think bitcoin is worth zero. I've never owned any, nor do I want to. I did consider shorting it, but thankfully worked out that any number could be the price. I sort of hope that the crypto-currencies fade away (thus not hurting people really badly), but I'm almost sure that it won't be a clean demise, and I may be massively wrong and one day be forced to use bitcoin as its the only sensible choice. I hope that they fade away mainly because I think they bring massive potential issues with them, and the more valuable they get the worse those issues are.
I'm 100% not the person to trust in terms of these valuations though - I've been completely wrong all the way.
As I am a moron* I don't understand Bitcoin and the various other made up coins. Money is Gold. It has an intrinsic value. Most currency is now a promissory note where its value comes from it being the only way to pay your taxes.
But where is the value in Bitcoin? It has no intrinsic value. It has no inferred value. It isn't an official currency of anywhere. I don't get it.
Up North I have a nephew who, at 18, instead of going to Uni went to work in a large, traditional, British bank. One of his co-workers introduced him to Bitcoin and before long he had made enough to buy, outright, a terraced house which he and his father redecorated.
Yep - some people have got very rich from its ludicrous spikes in value. Others have lost a significant portion of their investment from its ludicrous spikes in value. I don't get it...
IIRC, Robert said on here that he lost $10k on cryto-currency the old-fashioned way, by outright fraud? Ended up waiting for a check (or whatever) supposedly in the web that strangely never arrived.
I wonder how many people who think they've made a fortune on crypto will find there's nothing there when they go to cash it out? 😕
There are problems even if you do cash out. Banks dont like it and will close accounts. HMRC and CGT also await, with most unwitting.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Isn't right of return at the heart of the problem. If it was granted to all those who lived in the area it would be the end of the State of Israel?
Guido quotes the ONS today with the estimate that the pandemic and lockdown to date has cost the taxpayer a cool USD372bn. And that's to May 2021.
Over the next 18 months Johnson & co will be trying to plug gaps and get some of that back. So no, there won't be an early election.
In fact, it would not surprise me if the colossal bill for covid/lockdown is now driving the agenda. It would explain why Johnson, after countless cave-ins, is suddenly standing up to SAGE.
He simply cannot afford not to.
I thought Modern Monetary Theory held that deficits are irrelevant and you can print money for ever without any bad stuff happening.
It is often simplified as such but MMT is essentially arguing that inflation rather than deficits is the bad thing that stops a sovereign nation printing money for ever. Of course inflation and deficits are closely linked so often conventional economics and MMT would lead to similar analysis. If we stay in this era of long term ultra low inflation then we shall see if (how long) the US and other countries can stay on MMT running massive deficits.
You have to ask what it would take for inflationary pressures to reemerge given the behaviour of central banks over the past X years.
Inflationary pressures were held in check in the developed world by China's export of deflation. The price of manufactured products didn't rise because China pegged their currency, and was happy to run trade surpluses into perpetuity.
Of course, the money has to go somewhere, so instead of it inflating the price of consumer goods, it increased the price of assets. (The 'carry trade' made a lot of rich people a little bit richer.)
I'm not convinced that China will be able to keep exporting deflation. Costs are rising there now, and their industrialisation process is mostly complete. Now, China could attempt to offset this by driving their currency lower, but it's easier to stop a currency rising than it is to drive it down.
So I would guess we're going to see a slow and steady rise in inflationary pressures over the next five to ten years.
Don't buy super long dated low coupon bonds.
What do you make of Piketty's argument that Asia's labour surplus is drying up, and so the cost of labour relative to the cost of capital will rise, reducing wealth imbalances somewhat in the longer-term?
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 4h 11. So yes, take the breakdown of patients by vax status in Bolton hospital as a sign that vaccines are protective against severe illness.
But do not think that this makes everything "fine" cos it doesn't. /END
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp Replying to @chrischirp PS to the heartless argument that unvaxxed people are to blame if they don't get vaxxed... 1) full hospitals are full hospitals 2) SAGE models suggest most deaths are in vaxxed people in a bad surge 3) dividing people in "deserving" and "undeserving" is wrong and dangerous.
She is rather missing the point with that "deserving / undeserving" dichotomy.
The lockdowns were imposed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying in unacceptably large numbers. Now with the vaccination programme there is no risk of the former or the latter happening, so there is no good reason to continue with lockdowns or continuing restrictions.
A separate question is whether the unvaxxed should get treatment if they get Covid as a result of their refusal to take the vaccine when offered. My view is yes - medical care should be provided on the basis of medical need not on the basis of whether someone has behaved stupidly or not.
Whether others will blame the unvaxxed for their stupidity is another matter. If people behave stupidly, they should not complain if others blame them, especially if they put others at risk.
I completely agree with this analysis Cyclefree. No, we shouldn't slow the roadmap to protect antivaxxers. Yes, antivaxxers should be given full care at no extra cost should they become ill from Covid.
This is a complete straw man. Can you produce a single 'anti-vaxxer' who wants you to slow down the roadmap? Most want it speeded up. Most never wanted lockdown in the first place.
Some people are comfortable living with risk.
Its not the anti-vaxxers who want it slowed, its some the scientists who want it slowed to protect the anti-vaxxers.
Read the sentence you wrote and ask yourself if its true in any sense whatever.
As we learn more about SAGE, we surely understand the faith in it displayed on here and elsewhere is utterly misplaced.
Other than being poorly typed I believe it in its entirety. Which bit do you disagree with?
I disagree that SAGE want to protect anti-vaxxers. They want to protect the unaccountable power they have been given over the people of Britain.
They are against the end of lockdown because of the massive diminution in their power that it entails.
Their desperate attempt to stop even the May 17 loosening via some ludicrous forecasting surely shows us that.
My main issue with SAGE (at least recently) is the unrealistic modelling of the vaccine roll-out, and what this means for the community. They have a difficult task - forecasting is very hard, especially about the future. They are having to talk to politicians, who typically are not great at science, and I suspect need fairly stripped down messaging. Their remit also does not include other factors - its not up to SAGE to worry about the cost of lock-downs. They are just advising on how best to avoid covid illness and death. Its also clear that some of the members do not agree with the current opening up roadmap and are coming to the media to make this point. This should not be happening - by being part of SAGE, their role is to advise government, not to try to impose their will on the public in this way.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 4h 11. So yes, take the breakdown of patients by vax status in Bolton hospital as a sign that vaccines are protective against severe illness.
But do not think that this makes everything "fine" cos it doesn't. /END
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp Replying to @chrischirp PS to the heartless argument that unvaxxed people are to blame if they don't get vaxxed... 1) full hospitals are full hospitals 2) SAGE models suggest most deaths are in vaxxed people in a bad surge 3) dividing people in "deserving" and "undeserving" is wrong and dangerous.
She is rather missing the point with that "deserving / undeserving" dichotomy.
The lockdowns were imposed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying in unacceptably large numbers. Now with the vaccination programme there is no risk of the former or the latter happening, so there is no good reason to continue with lockdowns or continuing restrictions.
A separate question is whether the unvaxxed should get treatment if they get Covid as a result of their refusal to take the vaccine when offered. My view is yes - medical care should be provided on the basis of medical need not on the basis of whether someone has behaved stupidly or not.
Whether others will blame the unvaxxed for their stupidity is another matter. If people behave stupidly, they should not complain if others blame them, especially if they put others at risk.
I completely agree with this analysis Cyclefree. No, we shouldn't slow the roadmap to protect antivaxxers. Yes, antivaxxers should be given full care at no extra cost should they become ill from Covid.
This is a complete straw man. Can you produce a single 'anti-vaxxer' who wants you to slow down the roadmap? Most want it speeded up. Most never wanted lockdown in the first place.
Some people are comfortable living with risk.
The NHS will treat antivaxxers, of course it will. The view that it shouldn't I'm putting down to pandemic fever of the brain.
But, look, this final sentence of yours, it just doesn't stand up. Enforcing population distancing to hold the pandemic and buy time for vaccines wasn't an act of cowardice. It was rational and it worked.
FPT Cyclefree said: "It's curious how most focus is on the anti-Semitic nature of this abuse but not so much on the anti-women nature. It's almost as if it's taken as a given that extremists and haters would naturally threaten sexual violence against a minority group's women when wanting to do them harm.
"Christina Lamb has written very movingly about this in her book "Our Bodies, Their Battlefields". It is a very necessary but horrific read."
"This doesn't just raise questions about people's attitudes to Jews but about their attitude to women as well."
TimT responded: Indeed, it is a depressing feature of many non-traditional wars. Such wars tend to be more personal and hence more vicious. We've seen the weaponization of rape in the break up of Yugoslavia, in ISIS' reign in Kirkuk, in Boko Haram, by the Burmese military against the Rohingya, the Chinese against the Uighurs, and now by Ethiopians and Eritreans in Tigre. Alas, it does not seem confined to one culture or one religion.
It is a depressing feature of traditional wars and has been for centuries. Probably millennia.
BTW, the most intractable feature of the Israel/Palestine thing is not recognised enough because it silences most people most of the time. It is this.
We agree with good people on both sides, in that their aims and objectives are entirely legitimate but they are not the same as or compatible with each other.
For understandable historical reasons compromise is so far impossible. Beyond that, what can one say?
As a result the reporting and comment is dull and predictable even though people get killed and hurt. There is nothing new to say, no progress to report, and virtually no wish to listen rather than shout.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Isn't right of return at the heart of the problem. If it was granted to all those who lived in the area it would be the end of the State of Israel?
Yes, because prior to 1948, Palestine did not have large contiguous Palestinian vs Israeli enclaves, but was a patchwork of neighbourhoods. If one were to base state boundaries on where people lived in 1948, there would be no viable state for either the Palestinians or the Israelis.
Of course, in a situation of genuine peace, at least in theory, once could have right of return AND a two state solution, with lots of Israelis living in Palestine and vice versa. Not realistic given where we are. But at least in theory possible.
In Yemen you have something similar. The two large tribal federations in the mountainous north east are the Bakil and the Hashid. Pre-Islamic law governs property issues within each tribal territory, with each Federation's law applying within their territory regards of the federation to which the landowner belongs. People from each federation live within the tribal territory of the other, owning land even while the land 'belongs' to the federation they are not part of.
It is both stable (having lasted well over 1000 years) and fractious.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Isn't right of return at the heart of the problem. If it was granted to all those who lived in the area it would be the end of the State of Israel?
I thought the right of return also applied to the very many Jews who were expelled from Arab countries. Not that they would want to, I imagine. But the claims for compensation would be something else.
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp · 4h 11. So yes, take the breakdown of patients by vax status in Bolton hospital as a sign that vaccines are protective against severe illness.
But do not think that this makes everything "fine" cos it doesn't. /END
Prof. Christina Pagel @chrischirp Replying to @chrischirp PS to the heartless argument that unvaxxed people are to blame if they don't get vaxxed... 1) full hospitals are full hospitals 2) SAGE models suggest most deaths are in vaxxed people in a bad surge 3) dividing people in "deserving" and "undeserving" is wrong and dangerous.
She is rather missing the point with that "deserving / undeserving" dichotomy.
The lockdowns were imposed to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and people dying in unacceptably large numbers. Now with the vaccination programme there is no risk of the former or the latter happening, so there is no good reason to continue with lockdowns or continuing restrictions.
A separate question is whether the unvaxxed should get treatment if they get Covid as a result of their refusal to take the vaccine when offered. My view is yes - medical care should be provided on the basis of medical need not on the basis of whether someone has behaved stupidly or not.
Whether others will blame the unvaxxed for their stupidity is another matter. If people behave stupidly, they should not complain if others blame them, especially if they put others at risk.
I completely agree with this analysis Cyclefree. No, we shouldn't slow the roadmap to protect antivaxxers. Yes, antivaxxers should be given full care at no extra cost should they become ill from Covid.
This is a complete straw man. Can you produce a single 'anti-vaxxer' who wants you to slow down the roadmap? Most want it speeded up. Most never wanted lockdown in the first place.
Some people are comfortable living with risk.
Its not the anti-vaxxers who want it slowed, its some the scientists who want it slowed to protect the anti-vaxxers.
Read the sentence you wrote and ask yourself if its true in any sense whatever.
As we learn more about SAGE, we surely understand the faith in it displayed on here and elsewhere is utterly misplaced.
Other than being poorly typed I believe it in its entirety. Which bit do you disagree with?
I disagree that SAGE want to protect anti-vaxxers. They want to protect the unaccountable power they have been given over the people of Britain.
They are against the end of lockdown because of the massive diminution in their power that it entails.
Their desperate attempt to stop even the May 17 loosening via some ludicrous forecasting surely shows us that.
My main issue with SAGE (at least recently) is the unrealistic modelling of the vaccine roll-out, and what this means for the community. They have a difficult task - forecasting is very hard, especially about the future. They are having to talk to politicians, who typically are not great at science, and I suspect need fairly stripped down messaging. Their remit also does not include other factors - its not up to SAGE to worry about the cost of lock-downs. They are just advising on how best to avoid covid illness and death. Its also clear that some of the members do not agree with the current opening up roadmap and are coming to the media to make this point. This should not be happening - by being part of SAGE, their role is to advise government, not to try to impose their will on the public in this way.
I disagree, they have an easy task, because they are never held accountable for their actions.
SAGE's forecasts following the opening of schools was off the charts incorrect, where is the scrutiny, where are the resignations? where is the reshuffling of the personnel?
Follow up question. If the initial disruptions of exports to the EU, administered by the French and others, have largely been overcome, how come those to Northern Ireland, administered by the UK, have not?
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
A case in point.
Have you considered that SAGE is not the body you think it is and does not deserve the credit you ascribe to it?
Have you considered that no humans, including scientists, are immune from being intoxicated by power and control over their fellow humans?
Qualifications do not confer morality.
I never have, I think you've missed my many, many rants at how shit SAGE have been at this over the last year. I know nothing about epidemiology, but I do know about data modelling and I've done an overall better job.
Ha. Did you mark your own homework at school as well?
FPT Cyclefree said: "It's curious how most focus is on the anti-Semitic nature of this abuse but not so much on the anti-women nature. It's almost as if it's taken as a given that extremists and haters would naturally threaten sexual violence against a minority group's women when wanting to do them harm.
"Christina Lamb has written very movingly about this in her book "Our Bodies, Their Battlefields". It is a very necessary but horrific read."
"This doesn't just raise questions about people's attitudes to Jews but about their attitude to women as well."
TimT responded: Indeed, it is a depressing feature of many non-traditional wars. Such wars tend to be more personal and hence more vicious. We've seen the weaponization of rape in the break up of Yugoslavia, in ISIS' reign in Kirkuk, in Boko Haram, by the Burmese military against the Rohingya, the Chinese against the Uighurs, and now by Ethiopians and Eritreans in Tigre. Alas, it does not seem confined to one culture or one religion.
It is a depressing feature of traditional wars and has been for centuries. Probably millennia.
BTW, the most intractable feature of the Israel/Palestine thing is not recognised enough because it silences most people most of the time. It is this.
We agree with good people on both sides, in that their aims and objectives are entirely legitimate but they are not the same as or compatible with each other.
For understandable historical reasons compromise is so far impossible. Beyond that, what can one say?
As a result the reporting and comment is dull and predictable even though people get killed and hurt. There is nothing new to say, no progress to report, and virtually no wish to listen rather than shout.
When I was doing A Level politics in 2004-05, we did the Israel/Palestine conflict and our teacher asked us to rank in order of importance all the issues in play. I can't remember what they all were but it included things like right of return of the refugees, water supplies, Jerusalem etc.
As the biggest issue in the conflict, I said religion.
And my teacher didn't like that one bit and said that was a long way down the list.
It feels like SAGE have been a bit stopped watcherish, and also don’t seem well set up for modelling in an extremely fast moving environment - with presentations regularly being shown to be days or weeks out of date.
Most of their predictions haven’t been up to much, but because they’ve constantly been preaching caution based on pessimistic scenarios they’ve been credited with being right even when they often haven’t been very close. And got a bit ‘lucky’ with the emergence of the U.K. variant.
It’s a bit like political pundits who always call for the same team and look sage-ish when the likes of 2019 happen, but closer examination suggests that their prior record hasn’t been quite so impressive.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Why do you say they've had too much power given the mistakes we've made have generally been in the other direction, ie taking action too late and easing too soon?
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid In the House of Commons @MattHancock reports there are fewer than 1,000 people in hospital with the coronavirus and we are averaging nine deaths per day. We should be confident in our vaccines but have to be vigilant towards new variants, he says. 4:34 PM · May 17, 2021·Twitter for iPhone 9 Retweets 112 Likes
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 19m Replying to @fact_covid There’s now 2,323 confirmed cases of B.1617.2 in the UK. 483 of have been seen in Bolton and Blackburn with Darwen. In Blackburn, hospitalisations are stable with 8 in hospital with COVID. In Bolton it’s 19 - the majority of whom are eligible for a vaccine but haven’t yet had it. 5 12 56
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 15m This shows the variant is not penetrating into older, vaccinated age groups, he says.
In Bolton the rate of vaccination has quadrupled - 6,200 were carried out last weekend. He says vaccines save lives and anyone hesitant should look at Bolton hospital. 1 4 41
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 14m There are now 86 local authorities where there are five or more confirmed cases. Bedford is the next area of concern and he urges people to get tested where possible. 1 1 20
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 12m The latest evidence suggests B.1.617.2 is more transmissible than the previously dominant “Kent” variant, but we don’t yet know to what extent.
Early lab data corroborates provisional evidence from Bolton hospital and observations from India that vaccines *will* be effective. 3 1 18
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 10m He hails the @YouGov research which shows more enthusiasm for the COVID-19 vaccine in the UK than anywhere else in the world.
From tomorrow people aged 37 will be invited to book their jab online. 4 1 19
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 6m Our strategy will follow advice from the JCVI:
1. Prioritise anyone over 50 not yet jabbed
2. Second doses will be given at at a schedule of 8 weeks
3. Follow the cohorts in priority order and the age groups as we open them - not jumping ahead with 1st doses for younger people 3 2 10
Covid Fact Check UK @fact_covid · 5m “We must proceed with caution and care and bear down on the virus in whatever form it attacks us, so that in the race between the vaccines and the virus it’s our humanity, our science and our ingenuity that will prevail”, he concludes.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Not really, looking at the last few weeks I count 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 - that's 1m additional vaccine doses vs the SAGE forecast that have been done in just three weeks in England. Also including a bank holiday which definitely hit numbers by a fair amount. This is also after the AZ decision to not use it for 18-39 year olds which has undoubtedly hit the first dose rate to some degree.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Why do you say they've had too much power given the mistakes we've made have generally been in the other direction, ie taking action too late and easing too soon?
They go unchallenged on the media and the media concentrate on the zero covid scientists rather than providing a balance
Indeed if sage advises HMG then they should do it without individual members going on the media and contradicting their colleagues views
Another 15% for Boris to bag then for those who vote Tory.....
It's just a good thing generally though. The governments of NI, Wales, Scotland, and England being generally perceived to be doing well. I think they are too, and for all the bad press that politicians deservedly get, the fact that they're being seen to do a decent job in this crisis is a feather in all their caps.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Why do you say they've had too much power given the mistakes we've made have generally been in the other direction, ie taking action too late and easing too soon?
Well, I think we locked down too hard and for too long. There's a law of diminishing returns, and while not doing some things was sensible (mosh pits - bad idea in a pandemic), many of the restrictions introduced brought such negligible benefits in terms of controlling the spread that they did not outweigh their costs (there are no 'zero cost' measures.) And people will die as a result, through missed medical treatments, through specific avoidable poverty, and through the UK being poorer and being able to afford less in the way of healthcare. But we'll never know. We can never show the counterfactual.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Isn't right of return at the heart of the problem. If it was granted to all those who lived in the area it would be the end of the State of Israel?
Yes, because prior to 1948, Palestine did not have large contiguous Palestinian vs Israeli enclaves, but was a patchwork of neighbourhoods. If one were to base state boundaries on where people lived in 1948, there would be no viable state for either the Palestinians or the Israelis.
Of course, in a situation of genuine peace, at least in theory, once could have right of return AND a two state solution, with lots of Israelis living in Palestine and vice versa. Not realistic given where we are. But at least in theory possible.
In Yemen you have something similar. The two large tribal federations in the mountainous north east are the Bakil and the Hashid. Pre-Islamic law governs property issues within each tribal territory, with each Federation's law applying within their territory regards of the federation to which the landowner belongs. People from each federation live within the tribal territory of the other, owning land even while the land 'belongs' to the federation they are not part of.
It is both stable (having lasted well over 1000 years) and fractious.
The Arab population of Israel "proper" (ie. pre-1967 borders) is 20%.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Yes I spotted that myself. Max has taken a government stipulated and explicitly acknowledged assumption within the SPI-M report, compared it with the latest available data and then suggested the modellers who used the stipulated assumption as an input into their model of producing inaccurate forecasts compared to his own unpublished forecasts. Laughable.
Follow up question. If the initial disruptions of exports to the EU, administered by the French and others, have largely been overcome, how come those to Northern Ireland, administered by the UK, have not?
Isn’t it because the EU have a mutual interest with the U.K. over the flow of exports at the EU-U.K. border but have none over the border in the Irish Sea? But are using the protocol to insist on no flexibility over the implementation of controls. Which, regardless of what you think of the protocol in general, is just wrong, and an abuse of their position, for what is, in general, largely intra U.K. trading of goods, and a pretty low risk of a compromised single market (compared to the processing at other borders).
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Not really, looking at the last few weeks I count 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 - that's 1m additional vaccine doses that have been done in just three weeks in England. Also including a bank holiday which definitely hit numbers by a fair amount. This is also after the AZ decision to not use it for 18-39 year olds which has undoubtedly hit the first dose rate to some degree.
You've failed to understand:
1) difference between projection & forecast 2) England based projection and UK based projection 3) the fact that the numbers of vaccinations are assumption INPUT into their model not an OUTPUT, and that they used the numbers they were asked to use by the Cabinet Office, which in fact look like a perfectly sensible scenario since to date they are in fact what has happened since the paper was published.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Yes I spotted that myself. Max has taken a government stipulated and explicitly acknowledged assumption within the SPI-M report, compared it with the latest available data and then suggested the modellers who used the stipulated assumption as an input into their model of producing inaccurate forecasts compared to his own unpublished forecasts. Laughable.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Not really, looking at the last few weeks I count 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 - that's 1m additional vaccine doses that have been done in just three weeks in England. Also including a bank holiday which definitely hit numbers by a fair amount. This is also after the AZ decision to not use it for 18-39 year olds which has undoubtedly hit the first dose rate to some degree.
You've failed to understand:
1) difference between projection & forecast 2) England based projection and UK based projection 3) the fact that the numbers of vaccinations are assumption INPUT into their model not an OUTPUT, and that they used the numbers they were asked to use by the Cabinet Office, which in fact look like a perfectly sensible scenario since to date they are in fact what has happened since the paper was published.
Yes. I'd add in another crucial bit:
4) Compared a 'forecast' (where there wasn't one by the modellers) with his own forecast (which is actually just the last few weeks of empirical data but in the wrong population).
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Not really, looking at the last few weeks I count 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 - that's 1m additional vaccine doses that have been done in just three weeks in England. Also including a bank holiday which definitely hit numbers by a fair amount. This is also after the AZ decision to not use it for 18-39 year olds which has undoubtedly hit the first dose rate to some degree.
You've failed to understand:
1) difference between projection & forecast 2) England based projection and UK based projection 3) the fact that the numbers of vaccinations are assumption INPUT into their model not an OUTPUT, and that they used the numbers they were asked to use by the Cabinet Office, which in fact look like a perfectly sensible scenario since to date they are in fact what has happened since the paper was published.
But those are numbers for England, not the UK. UK total numbers are higher than that.
Model inputs that were wrong. So they're either too stupid to recognise that, given that the city forecasters have been running rings around them and said so at the time, or knowingly used because they were too cowardly to call out the politicians looking for specific outcomes. Neither reflects well on them.
Follow up question. If the initial disruptions of exports to the EU, administered by the French and others, have largely been overcome, how come those to Northern Ireland, administered by the UK, have not?
Isn’t it because the EU have a mutual interest with the U.K. over the flow of exports at the EU-U.K. border but have none over the border in the Irish Sea? But are using the protocol to insist on no flexibility over the implementation of controls. Which, regardless of what you think of the protocol in general, is just wrong, and an abuse of their position, for what is, in general, largely intra U.K. trading of goods, and a pretty low risk of a compromised single market (compared to the processing at other borders).
In the end the EU will have to face the likelihood of Boris withdrawing from the protocol and deal with it
Lets be fair, @Scott_xP never refers to that disaster that is UVDL who threatened to do just that some months ago
In all these issues calm heads are needed, and hopefully the UK and Irish governments will come to a mutual agreement and the EU will need to be on board, otherwise it will be unenforceable until they are
Emphasis there is on the phrase "currently". As a Bozo-sceptic, even I would give them the benefit of the doubt at the moment. If I were asked "HAS the government TAKEN the right measures to address the coronavirus pandemic?" then "no" , or somewhere in between would be appropriate. That question smacks of a partial questioner wanting to get a positive answer for the government/Conservative Party.
"Lue Elizondo: Look, Bill, I'm not, I'm not telling you that, that it doesn't sound wacky. What I'm telling you, it's real. The question is, what is it? What are its intentions? What are its capabilities?
As an engineer I've always been naturally sceptical of stories like these, but it's getting harder and harder to maintain that stance. Bonkers as it sounds, clearly something that can be tracked visually, on radar, and by IR is physically present, not some kind of illusion.
I'm glad the US is starting to take this seriously. They should pack an aircraft with every sensor known to man, optical, IR, gravimetric, et al, and fly it around in an area where these sightings are happening.
These things are clearly real - they do appear to be able to operate both in ways current technology cannot duplicate and also trans medium (ie in water and in air)
The question is where do they come from - it isn't impossible that they come from China or Russia ( I saw someone say Iran - but nah can't see that ) - but it seems unlikely.
Ah. Glad you're on. Not being paying huge attention to it but could you pls let me know what was the catalyst for this latest bout of violence in the ME?
Excellent thanks. So the Israelis tried to turf out the people who had been living there for decades (but perhaps not centuries...).
Simon the Just, eh? No wonder the problem seems to be intractable.
The Israeli Jews say that they legally own the land and they've owned it since the Ottomans, but were kicked out by the Jordanians and Palestinians settled there and they want their land back. They say they're the legal owners of the land.
The Palestinians say that its their home that they were settled in by the Jordanians in the 50s.
The Courts have backed the Jewish owners of the land.
There is a problem with that simple interpretation, though.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/16/a-raid-a-march-a-court-case-how-israel-spiralled-into-a-deadly-conflict ...The Sheikh Jarrah case is incendiary for many Palestinians because would-be settlers cite an Israeli law allowing Jews to reclaim ownership of property lost before 1948. Palestinians have no equivalent legal means to reclaim property that became part of the state of Israel at the same time. “The law is written to privilege Jews over non-Jews. It is house-by-house, neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood apartheid,” said Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian political analyst.
The families at the heart of the dispute have lived there since the 1950s, after being forced to abandon or flee their homes in the fighting that preceded the declaration of the state of Israel in 1948....
Indeed but ironically of course the Palestinians do actually still claim a "right of return" and a "right of return" for those who left Israel in the fighting in the 40s - and to the property. About five million Palestinians are claimed by the Palestinian side to have a "right of return".
The principle of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed holds good in most international agreements. It is perfectly reasonable to want 'right of return' for yourself, but to deny it to others until it is granted to all parties.
Isn't right of return at the heart of the problem. If it was granted to all those who lived in the area it would be the end of the State of Israel?
Of course. But what Israeli law has done, by granting that potential right to one side and not the other, is effectively set up a ratchet which works only to abstract the property of non-Jewish citizens over time. (A similar process continues in the occupied West Bank.)
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
The SAGE projections (explicitly stated as not being forecasts in their paper) were based on Cabinet office central rollout scenario - which was 2.7m vaccinations per week for England only.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
Not really, looking at the last few weeks I count 3.2, 3.0, 2.9 - that's 1m additional vaccine doses that have been done in just three weeks in England. Also including a bank holiday which definitely hit numbers by a fair amount. This is also after the AZ decision to not use it for 18-39 year olds which has undoubtedly hit the first dose rate to some degree.
You've failed to understand:
1) difference between projection & forecast 2) England based projection and UK based projection 3) the fact that the numbers of vaccinations are assumption INPUT into their model not an OUTPUT, and that they used the numbers they were asked to use by the Cabinet Office, which in fact look like a perfectly sensible scenario since to date they are in fact what has happened since the paper was published.
But those are numbers for England, not the UK. UK total numbers are higher than that.
Model inputs that were wrong. So they're either too stupid to recognise that, given that the city forecasters have been running rings around them and said so at the time, or knowingly used because they were too cowardly to call out the politicians looking for specific outcomes. Neither reflects well on them.
This is almost akin to some mercenary London banker lambasting Alan Turing and his mates during the 1940s.. for being a bit dim.
I am pleased you've managed to help your employers make more money, meanwhile the modellers have helped to save many lives.
Wow - you seem a little bit unhinged about football fans celebrating a football win.
He's from Scotland. It happens so rarely...
It happens on an annual basis just like every other place
Celtic win. Or Rangers win.
A whole season, as exciting as a coin toss.....
Er, last 10 seasons - Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic Celtic RANGERS.
That's a bent coin.
Do you realise that any other sequence that you may have listed is equally unlikely?
True! Very good.
But looking at the population rather than the order ... a tad suspicious.
No not at all. If you toss a completely fair coin long enough you'll get that sequence without doubt. Just because it happens is no reason to discard the idea that the coin is fair. In fact if it never happened that would be far more suspect.
There's a chap called Jaynes who wrote some great books on probability. His work isn't easy, and I find it rather hard work, but I'm pretty sure he's got the right end of the stick.
A subject I thought I knew very well turns out to be one that I don't. I'll keep trying though.
Also re:the NI protocol, whilst some people are apt to happily laugh and say that it’s the British Govt’s fault for agreeing to it, it is IMO reasonable to say that it wasn’t supposed to be a points scoring exercise and the fundamental purpose of the protocol wasn’t to allow Brexit to happen, or to make a United Ireland more likely, but simply to preserve peace in Northern Ireland within the context of the Good Friday settlement. And given that the Protocol as implemented was actually largely the EU’s idea (rather than May’s compromise), then they really should have some interest in demonstrating that it is capable of being made workable.
Emphasis there is on the phrase "currently". As a Bozo-sceptic, even I would give them the benefit of the doubt at the moment. If I were asked "HAS the government TAKEN the right measures to address the coronavirus pandemic?" then "no" , or somewhere in between would be appropriate. That question smacks of a partial questioner wanting to get a positive answer for the government/Conservative Party.
My view is that they have, over the last year or more, taken a number of decisions - even though warned at he time that they were wrong - which have resulted in people dying unnecessarily. This is not hindsight, this was clearly the Government failing to take the correct action and it being pointed out to them at the time.
No amount of 'getting things right' later on can compensate for that so I would be in the same boat as you and, in my case, have to answer no.
Also re:the NI protocol, whilst some people are apt to happily laugh and say that it’s the British Govt’s fault for agreeing to it, it is IMO reasonable to say that it wasn’t supposed to be a points scoring exercise and the fundamental purpose of the protocol wasn’t to allow Brexit to happen, or to make a United Ireland more likely, but simply to preserve peace in Northern Ireland within the context of the Good Friday settlement. And given that the Protocol as implemented was actually largely the EU’s idea (rather than May’s compromise), then they really should have some interest in demonstrating that it is capable of being made workable.
The protocol also contains defined criteria by which it can be judged to be not working: if it causes economic or societal difficulties or if it leads to trade diversion. Given that this is obviously the case, one side can't wash their hands of it.
Follow up question. If the initial disruptions of exports to the EU, administered by the French and others, have largely been overcome, how come those to Northern Ireland, administered by the UK, have not?
Isn’t it because the EU have a mutual interest with the U.K. over the flow of exports at the EU-U.K. border but have none over the border in the Irish Sea? But are using the protocol to insist on no flexibility over the implementation of controls. Which, regardless of what you think of the protocol in general, is just wrong, and an abuse of their position, for what is, in general, largely intra U.K. trading of goods, and a pretty low risk of a compromised single market (compared to the processing at other borders).
In the end the EU will have to face the likelihood of Boris withdrawing from the protocol and deal with it
Lets be fair, @Scott_xP never refers to that disaster that is UVDL who threatened to do just that some months ago
In all these issues calm heads are needed, and hopefully the UK and Irish governments will come to a mutual agreement and the EU will need to be on board, otherwise it will be unenforceable until they are
Get that oven ready chicken slaughtered and plucked Boris, LOL. If French shut Calais for a day the UK is stuffed.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Why do you say they've had too much power given the mistakes we've made have generally been in the other direction, ie taking action too late and easing too soon?
Well, I think we locked down too hard and for too long. There's a law of diminishing returns, and while not doing some things was sensible (mosh pits - bad idea in a pandemic), many of the restrictions introduced brought such negligible benefits in terms of controlling the spread that they did not outweigh their costs (there are no 'zero cost' measures.) And people will die as a result, through missed medical treatments, through specific avoidable poverty, and through the UK being poorer and being able to afford less in the way of healthcare. But we'll never know. We can never show the counterfactual.
There will be a lot of study of this after the event.* It will be hard to untangle, but with a lot of different places doing different things at different times, I do think we'll end up with a fairly good idea of what worked and what didn't. It'll take some time, as the noise will be large compared to the signal, so different studies will get different answers, but the clearly effective things will become apparent, as will the 'meh' things.
Unfortunately, some of it will be Covid-specific and not necessarily transferable next time (if next time is a hundred years since, we'll likely have forgotten much of it anyway). But I do expect (a) a lot more research on how/when pathogens can become airbourne so we're better at working out which things are airbourne and and (b) what works best against those kinds of infections.
*Edit to add: As in reported mostly after this is all over. There are a lot of studies ongoing already, but some of it will also still be in funding processes (the general lessons for the future stuff, more than the Covid-specific which has been fast-tracked to a greater extent)
Follow up question. If the initial disruptions of exports to the EU, administered by the French and others, have largely been overcome, how come those to Northern Ireland, administered by the UK, have not?
Isn’t it because the EU have a mutual interest with the U.K. over the flow of exports at the EU-U.K. border but have none over the border in the Irish Sea? But are using the protocol to insist on no flexibility over the implementation of controls. Which, regardless of what you think of the protocol in general, is just wrong, and an abuse of their position, for what is, in general, largely intra U.K. trading of goods, and a pretty low risk of a compromised single market (compared to the processing at other borders).
Why did the buffoon invent it and sign up to it then.
Just like to point out that those SAGE forecasts had us doing 2.7m vaccinations per week, we're now at 3.7m per week and climbing. I don't understand how scientists with access to government internal data have done a worse job than city analysts who are working with third hand data we get from industry sources.
I think we need to chuck a load of them in the bin with the journalists....it keeps happening, remember the UoW model where they got all the basic input parameters wrong in terms of things like ICU beds and they had mental confidence intervals.
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 7h SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
And the medio lap it up with no counter balance
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
Why do you say they've had too much power given the mistakes we've made have generally been in the other direction, ie taking action too late and easing too soon?
Well, I think we locked down too hard and for too long. There's a law of diminishing returns, and while not doing some things was sensible (mosh pits - bad idea in a pandemic), many of the restrictions introduced brought such negligible benefits in terms of controlling the spread that they did not outweigh their costs (there are no 'zero cost' measures.) And people will die as a result, through missed medical treatments, through specific avoidable poverty, and through the UK being poorer and being able to afford less in the way of healthcare. But we'll never know. We can never show the counterfactual.
Some of the individual measures were unnecessary and badly framed but it's clear that where we erred, by and large, was in consistently underestimating Covid.
Take the 1st lockdown. The virus was spreading rapidly and projections said drastic action was needed otherwise the NHS would fall over and deaths could be huge with people unable to access treatment. We eventually did it and what happened? The NHS damn near did fall over in places during the April peak. Then the measures kicked in and numbers started to fall.
That has every indication of something which was done just in time to avert catastrophe, something which really ought to have been done sooner. I've yet to hear a good counter-argument to this.
Comments
We had the firebreak one with again nonsense confidence intervals going from a firebreak might save anywhere between a few 100 and 100k lives in 3 months. If my models outputted such nonsense, I would be back looking at rewriting the model, as we might as well got binface to make the prediction.
Take a bow, Sir.
🚨Lowest Lab figure since Feb 2020🚨
🚨Largest Con lead since May 2020🚨
NEW Westminster Voting Intention:
🔵Con 43 (+1)
🔴Lab 32 (-2)
🟠LDM 8 (=)
🟢Green 5 (+1)
🟡SNP 4 (-1)
⚪️Other 8 (=)
14-16 May
(Changes from 7-9 May)
Have you considered that SAGE is not the body you think it is and does not deserve the credit you ascribe to it?
Have you considered that no humans, including scientists, are immune from being intoxicated by power and control over their fellow humans?
Qualifications do not confer morality.
@JamesMelville
·
7h
SAGE members are crawling all over the broadcast media this morning trying to spook everyone over the Indian variant / saying the restrictions shouldn’t be lifted. Behavioural scientists and mathematician modellers literally telling the country to stay in their box.
A whole season, as exciting as a coin toss.....
@timspector
·
1h
Worried about the Indian variant? While our latest ZOE data still shows hotspots in Bolton Bedford, Oldham and Glasgow where the variant exists- the UK picture is not showing any signs of an increase with cases staying at around 2000 symptomatic cases per day which is v.low. Thx
These particular men may have a different culture. But rape as a weapon is and has been used by men of all cultures, including by so-called civilised ones. This is not only a Muslim issue.
CAN IT BE TRUE THAT @CHRIS IS NOT THE SMARTEST GUY IN THE ROOM?
He assured us he was.
Tory Boys 43
Others 8
I am not saying bitcoin is good value (or not) but you are misunderstanding how currencies are formed.
They are against the end of lockdown because of the massive diminution in their power that it entails.
Their desperate attempt to stop even the May 17 loosening via some ludicrous forecasting surely shows us that.
Actually LOLed at that one.
Tether is a scam.
Ergo....
City analysts, meanwhile, are used to forensically sifting through the data to understand patterns, meanings, and peculiarities and thereby create models and forecasts. They are not bounded by anything except an enquiring mind.
Doesn't surprise me at all that they should have been able to do this.
And as I have said from Day One - if you put the CMO, CSO and Boris on screen every day talking about mountaineering, pretty soon mountaineering would be banned.
Economists are much like Alchemists at this point. Very wise undoubtedly, but plain wrong in at least some big ways too. I'm probably mostly of the latter (I'm not an economist anyway).
Didn't realise he would turn out more like the comedian than a viral immunologist.
Its also clear that some of the members do not agree with the current opening up roadmap and are coming to the media to make this point. This should not be happening - by being part of SAGE, their role is to advise government, not to try to impose their will on the public in this way.
I am at the stage now that when I hear one of these sage/Independent sage bods seeking a zero covid policy and to hold us all to ransom I switch off
They have had too much power and are far from sage as far as I can see
The media and these organisation's need to be front, centre and throughout the public enquiry
https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/more-flexible-storage-conditions-biontechpfizers-covid-19-vaccine
But, look, this final sentence of yours, it just doesn't stand up. Enforcing population distancing to hold the pandemic and buy time for vaccines wasn't an act of cowardice. It was rational and it worked.
BTW, the most intractable feature of the Israel/Palestine thing is not recognised enough because it silences most people most of the time. It is this.
We agree with good people on both sides, in that their aims and objectives are entirely legitimate but they are not the same as or compatible with each other.
For understandable historical reasons compromise is so far impossible. Beyond that, what can one say?
As a result the reporting and comment is dull and predictable even though people get killed and hurt. There is nothing new to say, no progress to report, and virtually no wish to listen rather than shout.
And since 31stMarch - we have been doing almost exactly 2.7m vaccinations per week in England.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/06/england-covid-vaccine-programme-could-slow-sharply-sage-warns
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/975909/S1182_SPI-M-O_Summary_of_modelling_of_easing_roadmap_step_2_restrictions.pdf
Of course, in a situation of genuine peace, at least in theory, once could have right of return AND a two state solution, with lots of Israelis living in Palestine and vice versa. Not realistic given where we are. But at least in theory possible.
In Yemen you have something similar. The two large tribal federations in the mountainous north east are the Bakil and the Hashid. Pre-Islamic law governs property issues within each tribal territory, with each Federation's law applying within their territory regards of the federation to which the landowner belongs. People from each federation live within the tribal territory of the other, owning land even while the land 'belongs' to the federation they are not part of.
It is both stable (having lasted well over 1000 years) and fractious.
https://www.cheshire-live.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/handforth-councillor-who-told-jackie-20613853
SAGE's forecasts following the opening of schools was off the charts incorrect, where is the scrutiny, where are the resignations? where is the reshuffling of the personnel?
That's a bent coin.
How to check-mate yourself in one move. https://twitter.com/Rob_Merrick/status/1394293114152620032
https://twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1394296371008741379
As the biggest issue in the conflict, I said religion.
And my teacher didn't like that one bit and said that was a long way down the list.
I was right, wasn't I?
Most of their predictions haven’t been up to much, but because they’ve constantly been preaching caution based on pessimistic scenarios they’ve been credited with being right even when they often haven’t been very close. And got a bit ‘lucky’ with the emergence of the U.K. variant.
It’s a bit like political pundits who always call for the same team and look sage-ish when the likes of 2019 happen, but closer examination suggests that their prior record hasn’t been quite so impressive.
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
In the House of Commons
@MattHancock
reports there are fewer than 1,000 people in hospital with the coronavirus and we are averaging nine deaths per day. We should be confident in our vaccines but have to be vigilant towards new variants, he says.
4:34 PM · May 17, 2021·Twitter for iPhone
9
Retweets
112
Likes
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
19m
Replying to
@fact_covid
There’s now 2,323 confirmed cases of B.1617.2 in the UK. 483 of have been seen in Bolton and Blackburn with Darwen. In Blackburn, hospitalisations are stable with 8 in hospital with COVID. In Bolton it’s 19 - the majority of whom are eligible for a vaccine but haven’t yet had it.
5
12
56
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
15m
This shows the variant is not penetrating into older, vaccinated age groups, he says.
In Bolton the rate of vaccination has quadrupled - 6,200 were carried out last weekend. He says vaccines save lives and anyone hesitant should look at Bolton hospital.
1
4
41
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
14m
There are now 86 local authorities where there are five or more confirmed cases. Bedford is the next area of concern and he urges people to get tested where possible.
1
1
20
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
12m
The latest evidence suggests B.1.617.2 is more transmissible than the previously dominant “Kent” variant, but we don’t yet know to what extent.
Early lab data corroborates provisional evidence from Bolton hospital and observations from India that vaccines *will* be effective.
3
1
18
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
10m
He hails the
@YouGov
research which shows more enthusiasm for the COVID-19 vaccine in the UK than anywhere else in the world.
From tomorrow people aged 37 will be invited to book their jab online.
4
1
19
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
6m
Our strategy will follow advice from the JCVI:
1. Prioritise anyone over 50 not yet jabbed
2. Second doses will be given at at a schedule of 8 weeks
3. Follow the cohorts in priority order and the age groups as we open them - not jumping ahead with 1st doses for younger people
3
2
10
Covid Fact Check UK
@fact_covid
·
5m
“We must proceed with caution and care and bear down on the virus in whatever form it attacks us, so that in the race between the vaccines and the virus it’s our humanity, our science and our ingenuity that will prevail”, he concludes.
Yes: 61%
No: 25%
Don’t know: 15%
1:00 PM · May 17, 2021·
Redfield & Wilton
Indeed if sage advises HMG then they should do it without individual members going on the media and contradicting their colleagues views
There's a law of diminishing returns, and while not doing some things was sensible (mosh pits - bad idea in a pandemic), many of the restrictions introduced brought such negligible benefits in terms of controlling the spread that they did not outweigh their costs (there are no 'zero cost' measures.) And people will die as a result, through missed medical treatments, through specific avoidable poverty, and through the UK being poorer and being able to afford less in the way of healthcare.
But we'll never know. We can never show the counterfactual.
Conservative 42% (-3)
Labour 33% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 10% (+2)
Scottish National Party 4% (–)
Green 6% (+1)
Other 5% (+1)
Changes +/- 10 May
Lowest Lab % since May 2020
Follow
@redfieldwilton
to see our VI first
1) difference between projection & forecast
2) England based projection and UK based projection
3) the fact that the numbers of vaccinations are assumption INPUT into their model not an OUTPUT, and that they used the numbers they were asked to use by the Cabinet Office, which in fact look like a perfectly sensible scenario since to date they are in fact what has happened since the paper was published.
But looking at the population rather than the order ... a tad suspicious.
4) Compared a 'forecast' (where there wasn't one by the modellers) with his own forecast (which is actually just the last few weeks of empirical data but in the wrong population).
Model inputs that were wrong. So they're either too stupid to recognise that, given that the city forecasters have been running rings around them and said so at the time, or knowingly used because they were too cowardly to call out the politicians looking for specific outcomes. Neither reflects well on them.
Lets be fair, @Scott_xP never refers to that disaster that is UVDL who threatened to do just that some months ago
In all these issues calm heads are needed, and hopefully the UK and Irish governments will come to a mutual agreement and the EU will need to be on board, otherwise it will be unenforceable until they are
But what Israeli law has done, by granting that potential right to one side and not the other, is effectively set up a ratchet which works only to abstract the property of non-Jewish citizens over time.
(A similar process continues in the occupied West Bank.)
I am pleased you've managed to help your employers make more money, meanwhile the modellers have helped to save many lives.
There's a chap called Jaynes who wrote some great books on probability. His work isn't easy, and I find it rather hard work, but I'm pretty sure he's got the right end of the stick.
A subject I thought I knew very well turns out to be one that I don't. I'll keep trying though.
No amount of 'getting things right' later on can compensate for that so I would be in the same boat as you and, in my case, have to answer no.
Again.
Unfortunately, some of it will be Covid-specific and not necessarily transferable next time (if next time is a hundred years since, we'll likely have forgotten much of it anyway). But I do expect (a) a lot more research on how/when pathogens can become airbourne so we're better at working out which things are airbourne and and (b) what works best against those kinds of infections.
*Edit to add: As in reported mostly after this is all over. There are a lot of studies ongoing already, but some of it will also still be in funding processes (the general lessons for the future stuff, more than the Covid-specific which has been fast-tracked to a greater extent)
Take the 1st lockdown. The virus was spreading rapidly and projections said drastic action was needed otherwise the NHS would fall over and deaths could be huge with people unable to access treatment. We eventually did it and what happened? The NHS damn near did fall over in places during the April peak. Then the measures kicked in and numbers started to fall.
That has every indication of something which was done just in time to avert catastrophe, something which really ought to have been done sooner. I've yet to hear a good counter-argument to this.