After the Portugal decision the front pages are entirely predictable – politicalbetting.com

Alistair said:

noneoftheabove said:

Alistair said:

I know I talked about this yesterday but there are some truly depressing vaccine numbers beneath the headline figures.

Basically any city in the UK has pitiful uptake of the vaccine.

Or young people live in cities and are only just being offered the vaccine shocker?

No, I'm not an idiot, I'm talking about at comparable age group levels. So 50-54 year old age group take up in cities is massively lower than the national average.

It has to be said, that is likely due to ethnic minorities. I expect there are large numbers which simply aren't even registered with the NHS.

West Midlands 45-49: 78%
Birmingham 45-49: 65%

Nigel_Foremain said:

contrarian said:

The way the government has us all completely over a barrel surely shows that 'vaccines are the way out' is at least a highly debatable statement. Vaccines have not bought you freedom. You cannot travel abroad at all, and probably won't be able to at least for this year. The return of everything else is still up in the air, and reversible at a whim.

Compliance does not buy freedom, clearly.

If you really want your freedoms now, just get Reform to take half a dozen points off the tories in the polls. Or five thousand votes in Chesham & Amersham.

You will be on a plane to Spain before you can say Michael O'Leary.

You are such a gloom merchant. Assuming you don't have an alternative persona for home life, I pity anyone that lives with you.

Not at all.

There is a way out. Permanently and forever. Its just not the way the government is showing you. The government's trade-offfs are, and always were, false trade-offs. Any trade off that involves you losing liberty is a false trade off.

The good news is that, anecdotally, more people are waking up to this. The polls aren't showing it yet. Maybe they will, one day.

Slackbladder said:

Foxy said:

BluestBlue said:

Behind every man now alive stand thirty ghosts, for that is the ratio by which the dead outnumber the living - Arthur C. Clarke

Boo!

Is that anywhere near correct? I thought that because of population growth and longevity a much higher proportion of humans are alive today than at any time in human history?

This little graphic is quite illuminating.

It's amazing that the level of native americans is so low, given the size of the USA. I guess that agricultural methods, or the lack of them held back their population?

Surely not quite as amazing as Africa? 41.5m on the entire continent and probably most of them on the northern coast of Fgypt, Algeria, Tunisia etc. The whole continent was a safari park.

noneoftheabove said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?

Britain Elects tweeted this
GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...

Yes. Corbyn!
But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.

Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori

You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.

Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.

(Though there wasn’t much in it).

Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?

If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it

I don’t have it.
I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.

I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note:
-the grey vote is decisive
-the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.

Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.

This would align to my view, which is that the opinion polls (and actual elections) at the moment are massively skewed by continual exposure of government ministers and the PM on TV. Retired people watch more TV than any other demographic, hence the reason for so many ads for recliner chairs and stairlifts!

The pandemic "extra TV dividend" for those in power is also reflected in Wales with Mark Drakeford, and to a lesser extent Sturgeon in Scotland.

Those who wish to dismiss this may want to ask why corporations will spend a fortune on TV advertising and PR to get their executives on TV as much as possible. Those in the media that look at political balance might want to reflect on how this can be properly addressed

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?

Britain Elects tweeted this
GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...

Yes. Corbyn!
But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.

Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori

You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.

Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.

(Though there wasn’t much in it).

Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?

If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it

I don’t have it.
I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.

I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note:
-the grey vote is decisive
-the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.

Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.

Those who are middle aged working class and working clearly voted mainly Labour in 2017 but mainly Tory in 2019, they are the key swing voters now and there are lots of them in the Red Wall.

You see the same trend in the US, in 2016 Trump won 40-49s and won the election but in 2020 Biden won 40-49s and the election even though other age groups stayed the same ie under 40s voted Democrats and over 50s still voted GOP

Yes. The crossover age was from memory late 40s in 2017 but 39 in 2019. Winning more working voters is why the Tories got a majority in 2019, which goes against @Gardenwalker 's spin which is why he wants to pretend you can mix the middle aged (plurality Tory voting) with the students but not the retired to spin a result he likes.

Labour wins the young, the Tories the old, whoever wins the middle aged wins overall. That's the Tories in 2019 and Labour in 1997.

Seems to me, based on the graphs I’ve shown, that Boris’s majority was based on middle aged and retired Labour voters from 2017 not voting in 2019

Leavers turned off by the ‘People’s Vote’

Many of them actually voted Tory in 2019, hence Boris won the Red Wall.

Hence too Burnham is a better long term prospect for Labour in the Red Wall as despite having been a Remainer he said pushing for a second Brexit vote would be 'arrogant' from People's Vote campaigners and he accepted the Brexit vote while still being more centrist than Corbyn.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/labours-andy-burnham-slams-arrogant-second-brexit-vote-campaigners

Starmer was only ever going to win over a few LD and Tory Remainers put off by Corbyn, he was never going to win back the Red Wall unless the economy nosedived

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Indeed. Particularly as social distancing appears to be so last year.
This could be dismal for unvaccinated countries.

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Thats not the latest estimate from PHE - which is 50%, with an added boost from those who have been the first people infected being more likely to be unvaccinated.

TOPPING said:

This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.

Hold it together, people, ffs.

Yes, perhaps..

Alternatively, the outrageous reality of a global plague has opened up our minds to other wild possibilities, and other REALITIES, and we can see the gorilla on the basketball court.

That is equally as plausible

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Slackbladder said:

Foxy said:

BluestBlue said:

Behind every man now alive stand thirty ghosts, for that is the ratio by which the dead outnumber the living - Arthur C. Clarke

Boo!

Is that anywhere near correct? I thought that because of population growth and longevity a much higher proportion of humans are alive today than at any time in human history?

This little graphic is quite illuminating.

It's amazing that the level of native americans is so low, given the size of the USA. I guess that agricultural methods, or the lack of them held back their population?

Estimates I’ve seen for the population pre-colonisation were more like 7-15 million.

They were devastated by European diseases that had travelled north from South America before any significant European colonisation of the north. Imagine what 70-90% death rates does to a civilisation.

Then the remnant population was squeezed by the incoming colonists in various terrible ways. Rampant alcoholism feuled by sale of hard liquour by unscrupulous merchants, the Trail of Tears, low grade violence from white settlers etc etc.

More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Indeed. Particularly as social distancing appears to be so last year.
This could be dismal for unvaccinated countries.

It will probably be far worse than the waves so far. As I've said a few times now those countries that got hit badly in the first wave, like us, might actually do better in the long term because of things like willingness to comply with lockdowns, prompt vaccination, being a country where people are rightly wary of the virus, etc.

Countries that are bored of lockdown and mostly unvaccinated are in a very dangerous position now. You only have to look at India to see how fast things can get out of control, and India's done quite well with vaccination compared to many countries.

HYUFD said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?

Britain Elects tweeted this
GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...

Yes. Corbyn!
But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.

Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori

You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.

Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.

(Though there wasn’t much in it).

Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?

If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it

I don’t have it.
I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.

I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note:
-the grey vote is decisive
-the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.

Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.

Those who are middle aged working class and working clearly voted mainly Labour in 2017 but mainly Tory in 2019, they are the key swing voters now and there are lots of them in the Red Wall.

You see the same trend in the US, in 2016 Trump won 40-49s and won the election but in 2020 Biden won 40-49s and the election even though other age groups stayed the same ie under 40s voted Democrats and over 50s still voted GOP

Yes. The crossover age was from memory late 40s in 2017 but 39 in 2019. Winning more working voters is why the Tories got a majority in 2019, which goes against @Gardenwalker 's spin which is why he wants to pretend you can mix the middle aged (plurality Tory voting) with the students but not the retired to spin a result he likes.

Labour wins the young, the Tories the old, whoever wins the middle aged wins overall. That's the Tories in 2019 and Labour in 1997.

Seems to me, based on the graphs I’ve shown, that Boris’s majority was based on middle aged and retired Labour voters from 2017 not voting in 2019

Leavers turned off by the ‘People’s Vote’

Many of them actually voted Tory in 2019, hence Boris won the Red Wall.

Hence too Burnham is a better long term prospect for Labour in the Red Wall as despite having been a Remainer he said pushing for a second Brexit vote would be 'arrogant' from People's Vote campaigners and he accepted the Brexit vote while still being more centrist than Corbyn.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/labours-andy-burnham-slams-arrogant-second-brexit-vote-campaigners

Starmer was only ever going to win over a few LD and Tory Remainers put off by Corbyn, he was never going to win back the Red Wall unless the economy nosedived

HY, old chap, you are still too obsessed about "remainers and leavers". By the time of the next election no-one will care about Brexit, unless it is shown to be an unmitigated disaster, which is unlikely as any negative effects have been masked by the pandemic. Even if it is a disaster it will be too late to do anything about it and those that voted for it will not want to believe it is a disaster anyway.

Besides, evidence from Mike demonstrates that while some will have voted Tory because of Brexit, most voted that way to stop Corbyn. Either way, the big difficulty for Labour is the fact that lifelong voters have broken their habit, and in large numbers. Once someone has stopped using a brand getting them back can be tough. Labour still needs to detox Corbyn. they have a lot of work to do.

TOPPING said:

This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.

Hold it together, people, ffs.

Well on the positive side I am about to be taken out for a rather nice lunch by my daughter which is her somewhat deferred Christmas present. So I may make even less sense when I return!

Sean_F said:

noneoftheabove said:

Alistair said:

noneoftheabove said:

Alistair said:

I know I talked about this yesterday but there are some truly depressing vaccine numbers beneath the headline figures.

Basically any city in the UK has pitiful uptake of the vaccine.

Or young people live in cities and are only just being offered the vaccine shocker?

So, to pick a random example

West Midlands
50-54 1st Dose% = 84%

Birmingham
50-54 1st Dose% = 74%

There are much worse like-for-like figures in there.

How many people left Birmingham during the pandemic? How accurate and up to date are the NHS records of who lives where?

Any anyway 74% and rising is far from pitiful. That is already higher than where even most developed countries will end up.

My own ward, Hightown, in Luton, has only 52% vaccinated once, and 33% vaccinated twice, which is pretty dreadful.

Sure there are bad local spots at the ward level, but afaik Luton is not even a city so not sure how that supports the claim that any city in the UK has pitiful uptake of the vaccine.

kinabalu said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

noneoftheabove said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?

Britain Elects tweeted this
GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...

Yes. Corbyn!
But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.

Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori

You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.

Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.

(Though there wasn’t much in it).

Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?

If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it

I don’t have it.
I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.

I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note:
-the grey vote is decisive
-the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.

Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.

This would align to my view, which is that the opinion polls (and actual elections) at the moment are massively skewed by continual exposure of government ministers and the PM on TV. Retired people watch more TV than any other demographic, hence the reason for so many ads for recliner chairs and stairlifts!

The pandemic "extra TV dividend" for those in power is also reflected in Wales with Mark Drakeford, and to a lesser extent Sturgeon in Scotland.

Those who wish to dismiss this may want to ask why corporations will spend a fortune on TV advertising and PR to get their executives on TV as much as possible. Those in the media that look at political balance might want to reflect on how this can be properly addressed

Those stairlifts look quite dinky but there's no way I'd have one. What if it gets stuck while you're in it?

Ejector seat?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

northern_monkey said:

Cookie said:

Foxy said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

One thing about the debate on this that was barely mentioned the other day is Brexit. That surely was the major factor driving the swing to the Tories in the over 65's between 2010 and 2019.

Of course this is the population with least to lose from Brexitism.

But by the same token the least to lose from Bremainerism.

Again, I think the idea that old people vote out of self-interest needs challenging. With childen and grandchildren you become more invested in the future of your country.

My mum voted Brexit because she thinks it will make life better for her children and grandchildren. Her children and grandchildren would very much prefer to still be in the EU and think life will be poorer for leaving. Remains to be seen who's right!

Mum is always right

Haha - you haven't met my mum!

Siri, show me the consequences of failing to add India to the Red List in a timely fashion.

Phil said:

Slackbladder said:

Foxy said:

BluestBlue said:

Behind every man now alive stand thirty ghosts, for that is the ratio by which the dead outnumber the living - Arthur C. Clarke

Boo!

Is that anywhere near correct? I thought that because of population growth and longevity a much higher proportion of humans are alive today than at any time in human history?

This little graphic is quite illuminating.

It's amazing that the level of native americans is so low, given the size of the USA. I guess that agricultural methods, or the lack of them held back their population?

Estimates I’ve seen for the population pre-colonisation were more like 7-15 million.

They were devastated by European diseases that had travelled north from South America before any significant European colonisation of the north. Imagine what 70-90% death rates does to a civilisation.

Then the remnant population was squeezed by the incoming colonists in various terrible ways. Rampant alcoholism feuled by sale of hard liquour by unscrupulous merchants, the Trail of Tears, low grade violence from white settlers etc etc.

More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_history_of_indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

All true, but doesn't really explain why the population of North America was so low in 1000 compared to South America.

My understanding is that an analysis of Native American languages suggests that after crossing the Bering Strait, human societies moved south to South America and then repopulated the north from South America. Had some massive calamity befallen the original settlers in the North?
It's not inconceivable that diseases brought from the viking transAtlanticists could have been calamitous for North Americans. Though it seems highly unfortunate that such a small European population and the relatively small number of contacts which must have taken place could infect the whole continent.

contrarian said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Thats not the latest estimate from PHE - which is 50%, with an added boost from those who have been the first people infected being more likely to be unvaccinated.

Julia HB asked Robert Jenrick today repeatedly if there would ever come a time when we would cease 'government by scary new covid variant'.

He had no answer.

So yo have two choices if you want your freedoms back.

1. cross your fingers and hope we don't get the variant from hell.

2. support people who want to give you your freedoms back unconditionally.

Actually 1. isn't really an option, because one day we WILL get the variant from hell.

Not sure it is a given that we will get variant from hell. As I understand there's a limit to the mutations that are possible that would cause total vaccine escape and even then we could engineer a new one pretty quickly.

A new novel virus out of a Chinese lab is another story of course.

Leon said:

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins

Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere

He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".

We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come

He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken

Yes, and for most of the last few months he’d been quite chipper. Before Johnson decided to piss our vaccine head start down the drain so as not to offend Modi.

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

The grey bloc is not decisive any more than the student bloc.

It's important but if the Tories lose their under 65 voters whom they win every single age of from 39+ and only have the grey vote then they lose the election.

Lol.

Would you mind giving us the absolute number of pensioners voting versus students voting?

How about you?

Labour got 10,269,051 at the last election.
Tories got 13,966,454 at the last election.

If the Tories were to get 0 working age voters and only have grey voters then how many votes is that from grey voters alone? Who wins the election then?

Ok so your new argument is “Tories got more votes than Labour in 2019”.

What is this, politics for the under 10s?

No that's not what I said. Are you functionally illiterate? All votes count, you can't lop off a fraction then pretend that's the result or meaningful.

If the Tories were to get 0 working age voters and only have grey voters then how many votes is that from grey voters alone? Who wins the election then?

It is an irony that is possibly beyond you Philip that you rudely accuse someone of being "functionally illiterate" when you are referring to a matter of numeracy. lol!

Wrong, it was a matter of literacy since he couldn't understand what I wrote.

I wrote two questions "If the Tories were to get 0 working age voters and only have grey voters then how many votes is that from grey voters alone? Who wins the election then?" and he saw the numbers only instead and took from that I only wrote “Tories got more votes than Labour in 2019”

Failing to read properly and understand the point being made was the problem there, not the numbers. A problem you have far too frequently too, you leap in with a two-footed challenge based upon your own preconceptions rather than bothering to understand other people or the points they're making.

I love your "wrong" at the beginning of your sentence. So Trumpian (we know you love him really) and arrogant. And what do you have to be arrogant about Philip? Sweet FA seems to be the evidence. Most of your posts demonstrate you have experience of jackshit. I don't agree with all of @Gardenwalker's posts but he does appear to have a modicum of knowledge of the real world.

Take the advice I have given you many times: go out into the world, meet real people, do some real work, even if it is voluntary and spend less time on your keyboard.

Nigel_Foremain said:

HYUFD said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

HYUFD said:

noneoftheabove said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

isam said:

Gardenwalker said:

HYUFD said:

Gardenwalker said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gardenwalker said:

eek said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The crux of the problem that @Cocky_cockney raises is that this government is functionally incompetent. I have been banging the drum for ages that "we won, we're popular, it doesn't matter" isn't good enough. Lies, corruption, incompetence, strategy based on newspaper headlines - this isn't how good government is done.

Since the start it has been blindingly obvious this clowncar government don't know how to communicate. Guidance that is contradicted one minister on the radio to the next that contradicts the law. A new 5 stage plan launched at 3.5. Regional tiers supposedly all the same but the rules are different in each place affected.

So it isn't a surprise that we're here. If you are double vaccinated then why do you need to isolate for 10 days and take 3 tests to come back from countries who have less pox than we do? Its illogical and stupid. They declared that 6 people in a choir couldn't meet covid secure in a venue to sing, but bands can play with the audience singing along. Who makes this shit up?

Fundamentally they do it and they get away with it because @Philip_Thompson and @Cocky_cockney etc rightly tear chunks of the government but vote for it anyway. They think you are stupid and tret you accordingly.

On linkedIn I currently see a thread from knowledgeable people complaining about another further coming HMRC attack on self employment.

The simple fact is that with the Tories on 40% percentage of the vote they can (sadly) do what they want.

As discussed last night, the Tories don’t need to govern for working people / the economically active.

The grey vote trumps all.

And as discussed last night that's complete claptrap.

The Tories win those aged 39+ not those aged 65+

If Labour won all years up to 65 then they'd win the election.

Sadly missing the point again.

The grey bloc is the decisive vote. Age is more explanatory than class (or education).

Hence the Tories can “fuck business” at leisure because the oldies have their triple lock and rising house prices.

Not true, the age at which most people first voted Tory in 2017 was 47 and the Tories did not win a majority.

In 2019 however the age at which most people first voted Tory was 39 and the Tories won a comfortable majority

You are missing the swing to Tory *within* the retired cohort.

I can’t read the article but what is the swing on the other wage bands?

Britain Elects tweeted this
GE2019: Labour won 38.4% of non-retiree households earning between £25,000-30,000 a year, but that figure represents a fall of 12pts on 2017...

Yes. Corbyn!
But astonishingly according to BES they still won all (non retired) income earners up to £100k.

Only under 34, over 34 the Tories won all classes bar DEs with Mori

You are (deliberately?) introducing new variables to muddy the key point.

Regardless of age, Labour won non retirees up to £100k.

(Though there wasn’t much in it).

Regardless of age, Labour won caveating based upon age?

If you want to exclude retirees then exclude students. You won't, because it doesn't suit your agenda.

The elephant in the room for Labour is that this win with working age + students in 2019 is trending downwards from 2017 isn’t it? @Gardenwalker you have the data, can you check please? Or @Philip_Thompson if you have it

I don’t have it.
I wish I did. But others noted, yes that trend is downwards.

I’m not here to say Corbyn is popular. Far from it. I’m here to note:
-the grey vote is decisive
-the narrative that the working class have gone Tory is...shaky.

Those who are working class and retired have clearly gone Tory. I am far from convinced those who are working class and working have done the same.

Those who are middle aged working class and working clearly voted mainly Labour in 2017 but mainly Tory in 2019, they are the key swing voters now and there are lots of them in the Red Wall.

You see the same trend in the US, in 2016 Trump won 40-49s and won the election but in 2020 Biden won 40-49s and the election even though other age groups stayed the same ie under 40s voted Democrats and over 50s still voted GOP

Yes. The crossover age was from memory late 40s in 2017 but 39 in 2019. Winning more working voters is why the Tories got a majority in 2019, which goes against @Gardenwalker 's spin which is why he wants to pretend you can mix the middle aged (plurality Tory voting) with the students but not the retired to spin a result he likes.

Labour wins the young, the Tories the old, whoever wins the middle aged wins overall. That's the Tories in 2019 and Labour in 1997.

Seems to me, based on the graphs I’ve shown, that Boris’s majority was based on middle aged and retired Labour voters from 2017 not voting in 2019

Leavers turned off by the ‘People’s Vote’

Many of them actually voted Tory in 2019, hence Boris won the Red Wall.

Hence too Burnham is a better long term prospect for Labour in the Red Wall as despite having been a Remainer he said pushing for a second Brexit vote would be 'arrogant' from People's Vote campaigners and he accepted the Brexit vote while still being more centrist than Corbyn.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/labours-andy-burnham-slams-arrogant-second-brexit-vote-campaigners

Starmer was only ever going to win over a few LD and Tory Remainers put off by Corbyn, he was never going to win back the Red Wall unless the economy nosedived

HY, old chap, you are still too obsessed about "remainers and leavers". By the time of the next election no-one will care about Brexit, unless it is shown to be an unmitigated disaster, which is unlikely as any negative effects have been masked by the pandemic. Even if it is a disaster it will be too late to do anything about it and those that voted for it will not want to believe it is a disaster anyway.

Besides, evidence from Mike demonstrates that while some will have voted Tory because of Brexit, most voted that way to stop Corbyn. Either way, the big difficulty for Labour is the fact that lifelong voters have broken their habit, and in large numbers. Once someone has stopped using a brand getting them back can be tough. Labour still needs to detox Corbyn. they have a lot of work to do.

The evidence is still the Leave vote is overwhelmingly behind the Tories even with Corbyn gone.

So unless Labour can find a leader to win back some of those Leavers without turning off centrists like Corbyn did or the economy collapses then the Tories will be re elected in 2024 given the country voted Leave not Remain in 2016

Leon said:

TOPPING said:

This seemingly widespread talk of and belief in ghosts, conspiracy theories, aliens, etc on PB of all places, is proof if proof be needed of the battering that people's mental health has taken over the course of this pandemic. They have sadly been beaten down and are ready to believe anything because that (tinfoil hat on) is how we are easy to govern.

Hold it together, people, ffs.

Yes, perhaps..

Alternatively, the outrageous reality of a global plague has opened up our minds to other wild possibilities, and other REALITIES, and we can see the gorilla on the basketball court.

That is equally as plausible

No that is not equally plausible. It is equally plausible that you will believe such things, but that is different.

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Leon said:

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins

Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere

He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".

We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come

He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken

Far too simplistic a calculation.

We have an NHS waiting list of 5million and counting, countless tales of undiagnosed cancers, a school age population up to 18 months behind in its learning, a hidden unemployment mountain of millions and an additional debt of GBP370bn. Plus, a potential wave of inflation threatening to decimate people's living standards for years.

How many deaths, in the now and in the next decade, will those cause?

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

I’m sorry but I have to agree with this. The relentless optimism about 21 June on here, which I used to share, is just wilful blindness

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins

Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere

He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".

We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come

He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken

Probably not because as @rcs1000 always says, if there's no official mitigation then it comes and goes in waves as people (logically) decide of their own free will to make their own mitigations as they become afraid and cease to be afraid. 500k deaths would be roughly 0.75% of the population dying - or 750 deaths per 100k people.

There isn't a single nation anywhere in the world that comes close to that. Not even Peru: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker

Yes, true, though Covid is not done with us yet. Unfortunately

DavidL said:

Conway's innings was truly superb but I can't help feeling that the reason that results have become so common in tests is that the grind them down school have lost out to the crash bang wallop school. The former, which should be safer, struggles a bit when significant time is taken out of the game. No play expected before lunch which will be held at the normal time so there is going to be at least a session lost, probably more.

If England continue to bat as they did yesterday there is just not going to be enough time to take 18 more wickets and probably score a few runs as well.

Don't forget or underestimate the way the pitch (should) change. Test match pitches should offer a little for the bowlers early on, then flatten for days 2 and 3 and then deteriorate by day 4 and 5, making it increasingly hard to score. Thats why chasing >250 on the last day is so difficult. Its an art to make pitches do this. In India the pitches were engineered to turn prodigiously from the off, on the instructions of the Indian team after they lost the first match. Traditional English test cricket the spinner won't expect to do much more than hold an end in the first innings, but will play a bigger role in the 2nd.

NerysHughes said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

Why are cases in India falling off a cliff at the moment?

To me that looks like the normal initial rolloff after a sharp surge followed by vaccine or lockdown - compare UK in Jan or Belgium last Nov.

They are at a vaccine % like the UK in very early Feb, and our cases had reduced by about half from Peak at that point.

Sujbject to data etc. Not sure what the lockdown situation is in India now.

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

That's making a lot of assumptions. We're not seeing an upsurge in either serious illness or deaths in other heavily vaccinated places.

To add the cheerful spirit of suicidal gloom, take a look at the Uni of Washington model. They have been quietly updating their predictions

By Sept 1, 2021, they predict:

950,000 dead in the USA. A cool fucking million dead

1.2m dead in India

Major new waves in Asia: off the charts in Malaysia etc

210,000 dead in the UK


https://covid19.healthdata.org/malaysia?view=cumulative-deaths&tab=trend


IMPORTANT TO NOTE: they are now estimating REAL death totals not just government stats

alex_ said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.

And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!

Somebody crunched the numbers a couple of weeks ago. Malmesbury? I recall it was ~5m but I could be wrong

It seems plausible, 10-20% of all-the-over 40s must be a big number

On ghosts. Never really been a believer.

But...There is no universal time and some posit further that all moments in time in a given space exist simultaneously. Equally if we subscribe to the multi dimensional theory of string theorists, it logically follows that all possible realities might exist simultaneously in the same spacetime too.

So ghosts might just be multi dimensional beings that for reasons unknown sometimes bridge to our reality. Or indeed we might be glimpsing theirs. I’m no expert in string theory though so that might be bollocks.

Either way, there’s not really any strong technical evidence base for ghosts and it’s more likely noise in human perception. And I suspect we’re some way from a report from the Pentagon to Congress saying “yes we have lots of data to say they’re there but we don’t know what they are” as they are doing for UFOs. Where there is apparently a strong technical evidence base for non human technology on earth, even if many wish to ignore it.

MarqueeMark said:

DougSeal said:

Siri, show me the consequences of failing to add India to the Red List in a timely fashion.

Alternatively, the cost of opening up in May was to take us back to the third week of April....

The Alpha variant was declining and continues to decline. The rise is all Delta.

Leon said:

DougSeal said:

Leon said:

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins

Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere

He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".

We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come

He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken

Yes, and for most of the last few months he’d been quite chipper. Before Johnson decided to piss our vaccine head start down the drain so as not to offend Modi.

It does look as if Boris has spaffed it all away. Fucking idiot. CLOSE THE FUCKING BORDERS, TWAT

On professor pantsdown’s original prediction, we got to something like 40% acquired immunity with about 150k excess deaths. And that was with a policy that seemed perfectly designed to ensure as many old vulnerable people as possible would catch it.

So he was a bit off. But certainly a bit better than just the correct order of magnitude.

MarqueeMark said:

DougSeal said:

Siri, show me the consequences of failing to add India to the Red List in a timely fashion.

Alternatively, the cost of opening up in May was to take us back to the third week of April....

Exponential Growth says Hiya

alex_ said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.

And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!

From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data

Unvaccinated

Under 30 8,760,331
30-34 2,906,417
35-39 1,934,636
40-44 1,209,928
45-49 874,049
50-54 655,395
55-59 515,686
60-64 358,994
65-69 235,308
70-74 165,838
75-79 98,429
80+ 137,919

Not completely vaccinated

Under 30 9,730,644
30-34 3,989,170
35-39 3,665,651
40-44 3,148,781
45-49 2,761,152
50-54 2,066,767
55-59 1,798,967
60-64 865,500
65-69 375,286
70-74 233,311
75-79 142,516
80+ 222,262

Malmesbury said:

alex_ said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Where do you get a figure of 5m from? Even supposing they would all get infected and wouldn’t be protected by a degree of herd immunity and personal caution.

And also bear in mind that one the basis of your estimate the NHS would collapse even if the “delta” variant was identical to the alpha variant! 50% of massive numbers is still massive numbers!

From the England weekly release (data up to the 1st June), and using NIMS population data

Unvaccinated

Under 30 8,760,331
30-34 2,906,417
35-39 1,934,636
40-44 1,209,928
45-49 874,049
50-54 655,395
55-59 515,686
60-64 358,994
65-69 235,308
70-74 165,838
75-79 98,429
80+ 137,919

Not completely vaccinated

Under 30 9,730,644
30-34 3,989,170
35-39 3,665,651
40-44 3,148,781
45-49 2,761,152
50-54 2,066,767
55-59 1,798,967
60-64 865,500
65-69 375,286
70-74 233,311
75-79 142,516
80+ 222,262

Ta. So, yes 4-5m unvaxxed over 40?

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Because that was unmitigated bollocks that got passed around social media by denialist idiots who wanted to believe it and so never bothered checking it.

https://theferret.scot/fact-check-neil-ferguson-covid-19-predictions/

And because his modelling back in March 2020 turned out to be pretty close to the mark.

That's why.

MattW said:

Leon said:

To add the cheerful spirit of suicidal gloom, take a look at the Uni of Washington model. They have been quietly updating their predictions

By Sept 1, 2021, they predict:

950,000 dead in the USA. A cool fucking million dead

1.2m dead in India

Major new waves in Asia: off the charts in Malaysia etc

210,000 dead in the UK


https://covid19.healthdata.org/malaysia?view=cumulative-deaths&tab=trend


IMPORTANT TO NOTE: they are now estimating REAL death totals not just government stats

Yes - to elucidate, the University of Washington model says that all those deaths have basically happened already. ie It is 99% a re-estimation of previous estimates.

Not 99%.

Check the curves on Asian countries like Thailand and Malaysia. Spiralling into a terrible third wave

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)

Leon said:

contrarian said:

I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.

I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.

That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)

I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.

Fuck them. Really. Enough

It is a slippery slope that my friend.

How about we stopping treating anyone who drinks more than 14 units a week?

contrarian said:

Leon said:

contrarian said:

I wouldn't mind if the NHS refused to treat unvaccinated people, if that's what was wanted.

I would happily contract out if I could take my tax money with me.

That's what we should do. Refuse to treat unvaxxed people (unless they have a valid excuse - medical conditions etc)

I do not see why my taxpayer's pound should go to treat stupid selfish people who endanger me and my family, when they are ALSO costing me money - and endangering the mental health of us all - by shagging the economy, because of renewed lockdowns.

Fuck them. Really. Enough

I am un vaccinated and you would stop me being treated. Fine. As long as I can stop contributing to the NHS. Let me contract out.

Looking at the post covid, supposedly 'protected' NHS, I really think that's quite a good deal.

Yes, I would stop you being treated. And you still have to pay your taxes because you are still going to use the NHS aren't you? And it keeps the country going, which you presumably want

But you don't get treated for Covid, no. You are left to die and we save money. This is brutal stuff now. We are teetering on the edge of another disaster

Selebian said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

I don't know whether we have seen some recent polling on this, other than general vote intention, but I suspect the government are really pushing the envelope with respect to people's patience with all these restrictions. We were told repeatedly that we needed to lockdown until the vulnerable have all be jabbed.

That has happened now.

But there are enough unvaxxed in the vulnerable groups to cause a LOT of dead and a HUGE number of hospitalisations. PHE is saying that Delta is twice as likely to put you in hospital as Alpha, and Alpha puts 5-10% of victims in hospital, so Delta will put 10-20% in hospital?


Let's say there are 5m unvaxxed vulnerables. If they all get it over the summer that's 50,000 deaths, and 500,000-1,000,000 in hospital. = a crashed NHS

We're headed for another lockdown IF this data is right (who knows)

However it is possible the stupid unvaxxed wankers will wise up when they start dropping like flies

Not sure of source for hospitalisation rates, but very crudely the peak of hospitalisations in Jan wave is ~ 6-7% of the peak in cases. So your 5-10% seems reasonable. However, that's all ages and - presumably, in January - skewed towards the older population. Surely a much, much lower hospitalisation rate for the unvaxxed who will be predominantly young? (at this point, mostly 30s or under for 3 weeks post vaccination)

it's actually worse than I said

2 and a half times the hospitalisations, not twice


The
@PHE_uk
report today paints a grim picture - TL;DR:
-delta variant has almost replaced the beta variant in much of England
- 50-60% more transmissible
- ~2.5x higher risk of hospitalisations
- Schools appear to be a key area of spread with many large no.s of clusters

rottenborough said:

contrarian said:

DougSeal said:

Selebian said:

Leon said:

Fishing said:

Leon said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Professor Pantsdown has gone back to doomsday mode....

Professor Lockdown' Neil Ferguson warns Indian variant is between 30% and 100% more infectious and twice as likely to cause hospitalisation in the unvaccinated compared to Kent strain

100% more infectious is pretty grisly. Jeez

Not as grisly as his 150,000,000 deaths from bird flu. Reality: 282.

Why does anyone still listen to this clown? Only reason: he's telling them something they want to hear.

Not true. Ferguson has generally been one of the more level-headed boffins

Remember his original prediction, right at the start of Covid, in an interview with Channel 4 which produced outright incredulity and derision, here and elsewhere

He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation".

We have had intense lockdowns and we basically shuttered our cities, and we still have 150,000 dead, with maybe more to come

He was right. If anything he might have under-estimated how many would die with no counter-measures taken

The 'pantsdown' thing is also a bit odd, as that's not the troubling bit of what he did - his mother in law defended him, implying that he and her daughter were already separated and the woman he slept with was apparently in an open marriage. Outside of lockdown, his actions appear morally fine.

The criticism should be (only) for the hipocrisy of breaking lockdown guidance (he did not break the law, as it stood at the time) while being one of the government advisors pushing the need for lockdown.

I guess it doesn't sound as good, but "Professor Hypocrite" is a far more suitable derogatory term.

He made a serious error of judgment in his personal life but if we disregarded professional opinion because of such errors then we wouldn’t listen to any professionals. His analysis has, in this pandemic, been sound and was, until Johnson spaffed away our vaccine advantage, quite upbeat of late.

Ferguson's serious error of judgement was to fail to balance he colossal harmful effects of the lockdowns he prescribed in his recommendation

In saying he thinks 21 June is a 'very difficult decision', he is almost tacitly admitting as much.

"He predicted 500,000 British dead "without any mitigation"."

His model predicted disaster for non-lockdown Sweden.

It didn't happen.

The model is wrong.

The model predicted 'disaster' for Sweden in a life as normal scenario. In Sweden, as elsewhere (although much less forced) people changed behaviour (and some restrictions were implemented)

The Ferguson worst case estimates are about twice (if I recall correctly) the actual death toll in Sweden. Compared to about 3-4 times the actual UK death toll (depending which death figures you use). Which makes sense if you consider that the UK locked down much harder than Sweden.

Edit: the source for Sweden ~1/2 Ferguson estimate under doing nothing is this Telegraph article, rubishing the model on that basis: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/13/really-need-inquiry-sage-forced-britain-lockdown/