The next G20 leader to leave – politicalbetting.com

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

OldKingCole said:

StuartDickson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

StuartDickson said:

IshmaelZ said:

StuartDickson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Dr. Foxy, throwing away nukes in a world where China, Pakistan, and North Korea have them (and Iran are seeking them) would be lunacy.

Pray tell under what circumstances Johnson is going to fire a Trident missile at North Korea, China or Pakistan?

When they fire one at us. Are they all going to be this easy?

If the international environment ever deteriorated so far that Pakistan, North Korea or China fire a nuclear weapon at the Yookay then a nuclear “deterrent” will have clearly failed, along with the human species.

But the point is that the deterrent hasn't failed. The nuclear deterrent has been the best thing for peace humanity has ever invented.

We had thousands of years of major wars, ever getting more serious, until eventually the "war to end all wars" was followed by WWII ending with the dropping of the atomic bombs.

The only thing that has ensured no further world wars is not NATO, its not the EU, its not diplomacy. It is the nuclear deterrent. It works.

The following people have their fingers on the nuclear buttons:

Joe Biden
Vladimir Putin
Boris Johnson
Emmanuel Macron
Xi Jinping
Narendra Modi
Imran Khan
Kim Jong-un
Naftali Bennett
?
?
?

Sleep well tonight. These brave souls are ensuring peace on our planet. What a privilege to live under their paternal wings. World’s greatest ever invention.

Don't think Bennet's quite such a risk compared with Netanyahu. Same applies to Biden and Trump.

Not sure that is a very ringing endorsement!

Of course many countries without nuclear "deterrent" have enjoyed 75 years of peace, while those with them have all indulged in multiple wars...

Thanks to freeriding under the shield of protection of those who do have nuclear weapons.

The theatre of war has never to my knowledge been in a country with nukes (not counting things like Falkland's since that's not our country). But plenty of countries without nukes have been the theatre of war.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Kinabalu, we might.

But if democracies don't have nukes and tyrannies do, that is not a step forward for the world.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ex-Health Secretary Matt Hancock takes lover Gina Coladangelo on romantic £87-a-night Alpine holiday

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9948981/Ex-Health-Secretary-Matt-Hancock-takes-lover-Gina-Coladangelo-romantic-87-night-Alpine-holiday.html

£87 a night in Switzerland. What were they staying in a travelodge?

Northern_Al said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ex-Health Secretary Matt Hancock takes lover Gina Coladangelo on romantic £87-a-night Alpine holiday

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9948981/Ex-Health-Secretary-Matt-Hancock-takes-lover-Gina-Coladangelo-romantic-87-night-Alpine-holiday.html

£87 a night in Switzerland. What were they staying in a travelodge?

You've misunderstood. £87 a night is what she's charging him.

paulyork64 said:

On topic what is the mechanism by which Suga loses his position? Looks like his government is unpopular but his party is leading the polls. Do the public vote for a party and then the winning party chooses their PM?

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

rkrkrk said:

Selebian said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigelb said:

Reposting this from the last thread - an actual randomised control trial (and a very large one) - on the efficacy of masks, just published.
The conclusions (masks do reduce transmission significantly) might not hold for Delta, but I think the trial is ongoing.

The Impact of Community Masking on COVID-19: A Cluster-Randomized Trial in Bangladesh
https://www.poverty-action.org/sites/default/files/publications/Mask_RCT____Symptomatic_Seropositivity_083121.pdf

Correction: The trial found and I quote "an imprecise zero" reduction in prevalence for cloth masks. Vaccines work as an intervention, cloth masks are a bad joke and a fashion choice not science at this point.
[snip]

That's a very odd way of putting it (in the paper, I know you're quoting). What they did was fail to find evidence of an effect.* It would be interesting to see the power calculations (I expect there in there somewhere but haven't read the whole thing) for what kind of effect size they powered for. Prevalence was fairly low too, which won't have helped the study power.

(I say this as someone not wearing a mask presently except when asked to, which includes e.g. signs on shop doors)

*Again, as I commented before, of an effect of promoting cloth masks. That's the intervention, that's what is tested. As not everyone wore the masks provided and some people in the control groups wore masks, the study will underestimate the efficacy of actually wearing a mask.

I'm not sure that's correct? As they have measured mask-wearing in both sets of communities, they will underestimate/overestimate efficacy only if their measurements are inaccurate.

What is impressive to me is that just a 40% ish uptake of mask-wearing vs. 10% ish can have a measurable impact on disease prevalence.

And they did find that the cloth masks led to a reduction in COVID symptoms, but (probably) because only 40% agreed to give blood, they couldn't identify an effect for cloth masks on seroprevalence.

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

OldKingCole said:

O/t..... is it?

According the Beeb, Raab says the UK government "will not be recognising the Taliban any time in the foreseeable future", but adds "we do see the need for direct engagement".

Distinction without a difference? Anyway, why not recognise them? They are unquestionable the government in Afghanistan, whether or not we like the idea!

Foxy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

OldKingCole said:

StuartDickson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

StuartDickson said:

IshmaelZ said:

StuartDickson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Dr. Foxy, throwing away nukes in a world where China, Pakistan, and North Korea have them (and Iran are seeking them) would be lunacy.

Pray tell under what circumstances Johnson is going to fire a Trident missile at North Korea, China or Pakistan?

When they fire one at us. Are they all going to be this easy?

If the international environment ever deteriorated so far that Pakistan, North Korea or China fire a nuclear weapon at the Yookay then a nuclear “deterrent” will have clearly failed, along with the human species.

But the point is that the deterrent hasn't failed. The nuclear deterrent has been the best thing for peace humanity has ever invented.

We had thousands of years of major wars, ever getting more serious, until eventually the "war to end all wars" was followed by WWII ending with the dropping of the atomic bombs.

The only thing that has ensured no further world wars is not NATO, its not the EU, its not diplomacy. It is the nuclear deterrent. It works.

The following people have their fingers on the nuclear buttons:

Joe Biden
Vladimir Putin
Boris Johnson
Emmanuel Macron
Xi Jinping
Narendra Modi
Imran Khan
Kim Jong-un
Naftali Bennett
?
?
?

Sleep well tonight. These brave souls are ensuring peace on our planet. What a privilege to live under their paternal wings. World’s greatest ever invention.

Don't think Bennet's quite such a risk compared with Netanyahu. Same applies to Biden and Trump.

Not sure that is a very ringing endorsement!

Of course many countries without nuclear "deterrent" have enjoyed 75 years of peace, while those with them have all indulged in multiple wars...

Thanks to freeriding under the shield of protection of those who do have nuclear weapons.

The theatre of war has never to my knowledge been in a country with nukes (not counting things like Falkland's since that's not our country). But plenty of countries without nukes have been the theatre of war.

We already are dependent on the USA for maintenence and targeting of our "independent deterrent".

edmundintokyo said:

paulyork64 said:

On topic what is the mechanism by which Suga loses his position? Looks like his government is unpopular but his party is leading the polls. Do the public vote for a party and then the winning party chooses their PM?

The main mechanism is that before the general election, he first has to run for a new term as LDP leader. This is looking a little bit uncertain because he's uncharismatic and not very good, and the voters are generally quite narked off about the dozy vaccine rollout and the silly olympics and all the states of emergency. However he'd probably still win the general election albeit while losing seats, so it's partly a question of internal factional politics and partly a question of whether the LDP would rather roll the dice and trade a likely win but with loss of seats for... something else.

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Stuartinromford said:

Stark_Dawning said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

I think it was patently obvious that the pool of European immigrant workers were prepared to work for lower wages. But they weren't slaves. We were happy to use their services. The question is: where's the moral objection?

Not just that. Unless we Buy British (or First World) for everything, we are using the services of people in distant countries who are probably paid less than UK workers. It's less visible, but it's largely the same principle.

eek said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

It does, if the brain surgeon is willing to work for less than I want.

Now its no where near as bad for the brain surgeon than it is a lower paid worker but we really should be careful regarding all migration not just high paid work.

For reference the salary needed to import an IT working is £30k a year, so in that sector migration still applies a lot of pressure on salaries.

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

paulyork64 said:

On topic what is the mechanism by which Suga loses his position? Looks like his government is unpopular but his party is leading the polls. Do the public vote for a party and then the winning party chooses their PM?

The main mechanism is that before the general election, he first has to run for a new term as LDP leader. This is looking a little bit uncertain because he's uncharismatic and not very good, and the voters are generally quite narked off about the dozy vaccine rollout and the silly olympics and all the states of emergency. However he'd probably still win the general election albeit while losing seats, so it's partly a question of internal factional politics and partly a question of whether the LDP would rather roll the dice and trade a likely win but with loss of seats for... something else.

Assuming Trudeau is narrowly re elected and Scholz becomes German chancellor, then by October Boris and Suga will be the only centre right leaders left in the G7, so who does end up Japanese PM will be of extra importance to this UK Tory government

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

That's going to upset the Express readers who were planning a retirement in Spain!
Oh dear, how sad!

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

That's going to upset the Express readers who were planning a retirement in Spain!
Oh dear, how sad!

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

edmundintokyo said:

paulyork64 said:

On topic what is the mechanism by which Suga loses his position? Looks like his government is unpopular but his party is leading the polls. Do the public vote for a party and then the winning party chooses their PM?

The main mechanism is that before the general election, he first has to run for a new term as LDP leader. This is looking a little bit uncertain because he's uncharismatic and not very good, and the voters are generally quite narked off about the dozy vaccine rollout and the silly olympics and all the states of emergency. However he'd probably still win the general election albeit while losing seats, so it's partly a question of internal factional politics and partly a question of whether the LDP would rather roll the dice and trade a likely win but with loss of seats for... something else.

Assuming Trudeau is narrowly re elected and Scholz becomes German chancellor, then by October Boris and Suga will be the only centre right leaders left in the G7, so who does end up Japanese PM will be of extra importance to this UK Tory government

Your first assumption is a pretty big one. I make it about 50/50 right now. O'Toole has surprised on the upside thus far. He is running as a traditional Canadian
Progressive Conservative, not Reform. He can afford to, and it makes electoral sense. He seems to have learned from Nova Scotia.

kle4 said:

Stuartinromford said:

Stark_Dawning said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

I think it was patently obvious that the pool of European immigrant workers were prepared to work for lower wages. But they weren't slaves. We were happy to use their services. The question is: where's the moral objection?

Not just that. Unless we Buy British (or First World) for everything, we are using the services of people in distant countries who are probably paid less than UK workers. It's less visible, but it's largely the same principle.

I often reflect that a lot of things we use are made by people treated like crap, or actual near slavery. I tell people the human misery makes my cheap clothes extra soft, or make the tea taste better.

dixiedean said:

CarlottaVance said:

Second wave vs third wave. If the BBC is going to continue giving us daily updates of how many people die from this endemic disease, it should do the same for all other causes of death.



https://twitter.com/cjsnowdon/status/1433364050377953280?s=20

That's a striking graph. January really was horrendous.

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

That's going to upset the Express readers who were planning a retirement in Spain!
Oh dear, how sad!

Though obviously we would respond in kind with the same rules if UK migrants were treated on the same basis as African, Latin American, Russian and Asian migrants by France

Anabobazina said:

Yes, as I was saying yesterday, Dura Ace is a common or garden antivaxxer. The reason he gets away with it whereas Contrarian receives daily attacks for it is just good oldfashioned craven PB sycophancy. There is no significant difference in the two antivaxxers’ positions.

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

None at all? Whatsoever? Acaademics, doctors, footballers? That's a radical policy indeed. Never seen anyone propose that in a democracy AFAIAA.

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

That's going to upset the Express readers who were planning a retirement in Spain!
Oh dear, how sad!

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

OldKingCole said:

StuartDickson said:

Philip_Thompson said:

StuartDickson said:

IshmaelZ said:

StuartDickson said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Dr. Foxy, throwing away nukes in a world where China, Pakistan, and North Korea have them (and Iran are seeking them) would be lunacy.

Pray tell under what circumstances Johnson is going to fire a Trident missile at North Korea, China or Pakistan?

When they fire one at us. Are they all going to be this easy?

If the international environment ever deteriorated so far that Pakistan, North Korea or China fire a nuclear weapon at the Yookay then a nuclear “deterrent” will have clearly failed, along with the human species.

But the point is that the deterrent hasn't failed. The nuclear deterrent has been the best thing for peace humanity has ever invented.

We had thousands of years of major wars, ever getting more serious, until eventually the "war to end all wars" was followed by WWII ending with the dropping of the atomic bombs.

The only thing that has ensured no further world wars is not NATO, its not the EU, its not diplomacy. It is the nuclear deterrent. It works.

The following people have their fingers on the nuclear buttons:

Joe Biden
Vladimir Putin
Boris Johnson
Emmanuel Macron
Xi Jinping
Narendra Modi
Imran Khan
Kim Jong-un
Naftali Bennett
?
?
?

Sleep well tonight. These brave souls are ensuring peace on our planet. What a privilege to live under their paternal wings. World’s greatest ever invention.

Don't think Bennet's quite such a risk compared with Netanyahu. Same applies to Biden and Trump.

Not sure that is a very ringing endorsement!

Of course many countries without nuclear "deterrent" have enjoyed 75 years of peace, while those with them have all indulged in multiple wars...

Thanks to freeriding under the shield of protection of those who do have nuclear weapons.

The theatre of war has never to my knowledge been in a country with nukes (not counting things like Falkland's since that's not our country). But plenty of countries without nukes have been the theatre of war.

We already are dependent on the USA for maintenence and targeting of our "independent deterrent".

Trident uses laser ring giro INS/stellar cartography for guidance so the UK can autonomously target. However the whole thing would fall apart pretty quickly without the massive and ongoing technical support from the USN. At some point somebody in the Pentagon is going to look at that row in Excel and ask why the fuck they are doing it.

You are correct about it being a colossal waste of money that hollows out other defence capabilities. Each one of the four Dreadnoughts is going to consume 2% of the defence annual budget to operate and that's after the massive 50bn+ cost of acquiring them.

Anabobazina said:

Alphabet_Soup said:

Anabobazina said:

Yes, as I was saying yesterday, Dura Ace is a common or garden antivaxxer. The reason he gets away with it whereas Contrarian receives daily attacks for it is just good oldfashioned craven PB sycophancy. There is no significant difference in the two antivaxxers’ positions.

Dura Ace makes us giggle nervously. Contrarian, not so much.

Yes, as I say, sycophancy. Glad we cleared that up at last.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Ex-Health Secretary Matt Hancock takes lover Gina Coladangelo on romantic £87-a-night Alpine holiday

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9948981/Ex-Health-Secretary-Matt-Hancock-takes-lover-Gina-Coladangelo-romantic-87-night-Alpine-holiday.html

£87 a night in Switzerland. What were they staying in a travelodge?

squareroot2 said:

Scott_xP said:

More leaking from FCDO officials against Dominic Raab -- arguably that's biggest argument for sacking him. Given the level of leaking, he's clearly lost control of his department, which can't be sustainable.

It's what happens when a lot of folk don't like you... https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1433339321688510466/photo/1

No... you sack the officials

Anabobazina said:

Yes, as I was saying yesterday, Dura Ace is a common or garden antivaxxer. The reason he gets away with it whereas Contrarian receives daily attacks for it is just good oldfashioned craven PB sycophancy. There is no significant difference in the two antivaxxers’ positions.

BlancheLivermore said:

I think we should institute a Right Said Fred Maths award

@skynews Adults who are fully vaccinated are 47% less likely to have long COVID if they contract #COVID19, a study says

@TheFreds So 53% more likely? That’s not impressive.

Slackbladder said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

None at all? Whatsoever? Acaademics, doctors, footballers? That's a radical policy indeed. Never seen anyone propose that in a democracy AFAIAA.

As always, theres 'good' migration and 'bad' migration. I expect people when they say they want to limit or stop it don't mean all of it.

edmundintokyo said:

HYUFD said:

OldKingCole said:

HYUFD said:

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

MaxPB said:

What's been really funny is the same people saying EU workers didn't result in wages being held down for working classes now blaming worker shortages and the resulting wage inflation on Brexit. They can both be true.

Personally I always thought that there were some areas where EU immigration was holding down local wages.

In high end skilled jobs, there is a world wide shortage. So economic migration doesn't hit the wages of top brain surgeons etc.

In the lower skilled jobs, there isn't a world wide shortage.

Barnier has now proposed ending immigration from outside the EU for 3-5 years, so it seems the price for freedom of movement from within the EU if he had stayed in it would ultimately have been even harder restrictions on immigration from outside the EU than we now have post Brexit

And will create even more problems for Brits. Would this apply to potential workers or retirees or both?

Barrnier wants an end to all migration from non EU nations to the EU for 3-5 years if he is elected French President next year, whether workers or retirees

He may say he wants to do that but firstly that doesn't mean he really does, secondly even if he does he has to win the election first, and thirdly France doesn't have the power to set EU migration policy.

GarethoftheVale2 said:

It's weird they have only included some G20 leaders. For example, Australia has an election next year. I guess they have left out Merkel as everyone knows she is leaving

eek said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I think we should institute a Right Said Fred Maths award

@skynews Adults who are fully vaccinated are 47% less likely to have long COVID if they contract #COVID19, a study says

@TheFreds So 53% more likely? That’s not impressive.

The sad thing is that a significant proportion of people will read what Right Said Fred says and belief them...

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

What's the story with Suga in Japan?

Generally shit show over Covid-19 and the fact most Japanese wanted him to cancel the Olympics/Paralympics which have became superspreader events in Japan.

Plus he's not very good, been in office for a year as well.

Anabobazina said:

Dura is antivax because of 'big pharma' and 'animals'.

Contrarian is antivax because of 'government' and 'privacy'.

Same shit, different reasons.

Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.

DavidL said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I think we should institute a Right Said Fred Maths award

@skynews Adults who are fully vaccinated are 47% less likely to have long COVID if they contract #COVID19, a study says

@TheFreds So 53% more likely? That’s not impressive.

47% is a really disappointing number but the overall effect presumably would reflect the fact that the fully vaccinated are also less likely to catch Covid in the first place. Does anybody know what the current estimate of the multiplier is there?

Cyclefree said:

edmundintokyo said:

MrEd said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Charles said:

@Alasdair

I don’t know how the number of SCOTUS Justices is set. I think (from here) there was legislation at some point.

So I am sure it CAN be changed. I don’t think it SHOULD be changed.

Its easier to think it shouldn't if you're OK with it being permanently rigged in favour of the GOP. Just like you're quite happy to see DC voters denied Statehood.

In the last thread you said that if the legislation was changed (which is entirely within Congress and the President's remit and authority) then it would "permanently politicise" SCOTUS. But how has SCOTUS not already been permanently politicised by the actions of the GOP in denying a vote on Obama's nomination then rushing through Trump's?

Had the shoe been on the other foot, had the Democrats acted like the GOP to ensure they had a majority in the Court, then the GOP got control of Congress and the White House then I have no doubt whatsoever that the GOP would be willing to expand the Court in response.

The Court has already been politicised.

What has been interesting recently on SCOTUS is that Kavanaugh and Comey Barrett - which had been seen as backsliding by Republicans with some of their decisions - now seem to be becoming more confident on siding with Republican / conservative arguments.

I think Kavanaugh has been pretty consistently hackish?

However I guess for religious conservatives the really big deal is abortion, nothing else matters anywhere as much. You may generally want to faithfully execute the law but if you think thousands of babies are being murdered every day then when that comes up you're probably more inclined to squint at the constitution and hold it upside-down and see if there's a way you can read it that will stop people killing the babies.

And this is where those who think like this part company with reality.

Women don't stop having abortions. They stop having safe abortions. Abortions will continue. They will be illegal and - likely - unsafe. Babies will continue to die, as will some women.

I could not have an abortion myself. I think it is the taking of a life, in some respects. I would prefer it to be safe, legal and rarer than it is. It is an act freighted with moral gravity. But so is forcing a women to carry a child to term against her will. So is forcing a woman who has been raped to give birth to her rapist's child. There are no good choices here. But there are some less bad choices than others. And permitting safe legal abortions is better than turning a blind eye to unsafe illegal abortions and the harm and deaths that result from that. The pro-lifers seem to ignore these. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to promote adequate and widespread contraception and sex education. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to challenge sexual predators. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to provide help to or alternatives for women who don't want an abortion or the child.

Bodily autonomy for women matters. A great deal. We have fought hard for the right to say "no". No to sex, if we don't want it. No to motherhood, if we don't want it. No to being locked up or denied the same rights (education / jobs / votes) as others. We cannot have these advances rolled back just so that others can feel better.

eek said:

Completely offtopic but someone elsewhere has just suggested a perfect solution to dealing with the Universal Credit uplift that disappears on October 1st.

Keep it but don't increase any payments for x years until inflation consumes all £20 of the current uplift.

dixiedean said:

Cyclefree said:

edmundintokyo said:

MrEd said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Charles said:

@Alasdair

I don’t know how the number of SCOTUS Justices is set. I think (from here) there was legislation at some point.

So I am sure it CAN be changed. I don’t think it SHOULD be changed.

Its easier to think it shouldn't if you're OK with it being permanently rigged in favour of the GOP. Just like you're quite happy to see DC voters denied Statehood.

In the last thread you said that if the legislation was changed (which is entirely within Congress and the President's remit and authority) then it would "permanently politicise" SCOTUS. But how has SCOTUS not already been permanently politicised by the actions of the GOP in denying a vote on Obama's nomination then rushing through Trump's?

Had the shoe been on the other foot, had the Democrats acted like the GOP to ensure they had a majority in the Court, then the GOP got control of Congress and the White House then I have no doubt whatsoever that the GOP would be willing to expand the Court in response.

The Court has already been politicised.

What has been interesting recently on SCOTUS is that Kavanaugh and Comey Barrett - which had been seen as backsliding by Republicans with some of their decisions - now seem to be becoming more confident on siding with Republican / conservative arguments.

I think Kavanaugh has been pretty consistently hackish?

However I guess for religious conservatives the really big deal is abortion, nothing else matters anywhere as much. You may generally want to faithfully execute the law but if you think thousands of babies are being murdered every day then when that comes up you're probably more inclined to squint at the constitution and hold it upside-down and see if there's a way you can read it that will stop people killing the babies.

And this is where those who think like this part company with reality.

Women don't stop having abortions. They stop having safe abortions. Abortions will continue. They will be illegal and - likely - unsafe. Babies will continue to die, as will some women.

I could not have an abortion myself. I think it is the taking of a life, in some respects. I would prefer it to be safe, legal and rarer than it is. It is an act freighted with moral gravity. But so is forcing a women to carry a child to term against her will. So is forcing a woman who has been raped to give birth to her rapist's child. There are no good choices here. But there are some less bad choices than others. And permitting safe legal abortions is better than turning a blind eye to unsafe illegal abortions and the harm and deaths that result from that. The pro-lifers seem to ignore these. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to promote adequate and widespread contraception and sex education. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to challenge sexual predators. The pro-lifers seem to do very little to provide help to or alternatives for women who don't want an abortion or the child.

Bodily autonomy for women matters. A great deal. We have fought hard for the right to say "no". No to sex, if we don't want it. No to motherhood, if we don't want it. No to being locked up or denied the same rights (education / jobs / votes) as others. We cannot have these advances rolled back just so that others can feel better.

Tough on abortion. Soft as s*** on the causes of abortion.
Appears to be the Republican slogan.

Mexicanpete said:

dixiedean said:

CarlottaVance said:

Second wave vs third wave. If the BBC is going to continue giving us daily updates of how many people die from this endemic disease, it should do the same for all other causes of death.



https://twitter.com/cjsnowdon/status/1433364050377953280?s=20

That's a striking graph. January really was horrendous.

You scamp!

I don't think that was the purpose Carlotta intended the reference for. The opposite in fact, "only" circa 100 deaths a day from Covid now, so why bother?