The Saturday open thread – politicalbetting.com

kjh said:

I'm getting to the point where I wish the bloody aliens just turn up and introduce themselves as transgender aliens who started COVID, just to shut Leon up.

rottenborough said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

What have the Romans done for us?

At least they weren't woke.

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

Yes, the oddity is filtered out before you can notice it. That's my point (albeit slightly inexact, I admit)

And completely the wrong point.

The point of the experiment is not that you see the gorilla, and think it is a player, it's that you don't see the gorilla at all.

If the question was "count the players" you would spot the gorilla instantly. But it's not.

Count the passes. No gorilla catches a pass. No gorilla appears on the court (as far as you can tell)

Scott_xP said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

What have the Romans done for us?

Hey, Siri, show me someone who thinks Scotland is brilliant based on reading the Nat onal but doesn't actually live there...

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

EPG said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

turbotubbs said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Stuartinromford said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The problem isn't the Tory party, its the voters. People want contradictory things but refuse to accept there is a contradiction. A series of events have empowered them to believe their genuine ignorance on a subject holds the same weight as actual knowledge and experience. They aren't wrong, the experts are wrong.

There is a way through though - find us a new Blair or Thatcher, someone who does know what they are talking about and has political umph. People said "that is Boris" but as all but the remaining holdouts now accept Boris stood for nothing, with no great policies delivered and settled in his time.

Ummm, BoZo was the politician more than any other in my lifetime that told voters they could have contradictory things. Denied the contradictions. That experts were to be derided.

He was the problem

The fact his opponents failed to make their case shows how poor they were

Not entirely.

If you are in a debate with someone shameless and dishonest enough, it can be really hard to persuade an audience.

It tends to go this;

BORIS-ALIKE Something involving cake and eat it

RORY-ALIKE (because he at least tried) That's not possible- once you have eaten your cake, it's gone...

BORIS-ALIKE There you go, with your doomy gloomy negativity. Remember we are Great Britain! We are being held back by your fears... (Continues ad nauseum.)

Boris style cakeism is a really attractive prospectus. It's awfully hard to argue against, because deep down we want it to be true, and want to believe that there's some meanie stopping it being true for us. That's been the case since the apple/snake/Eve fiasco in Genesis.

It would have been better for the UK had someone successfully argued us out of Borisism, but I'm not convinced that was possible.

It would have been better for the Conservatives and the UK to have not fallen for Borisism, but that required human nature to be something it isn't.

The culpability for (gestures round) all of this belongs with the clique who proposed it, who lied to the public about it, who smeared and deposed those who questioned it.

Not particularly with those who fell for it, and certainly not with those who did their best to argue against it.

Unless you had a better plan to argue against Boris, in which case I'm all ears.

And unless he didn't vote for the Conservatives when Mr Johnson was their leader.

I want to make this clear

I supported Johnson on brexit, covid and Ukraine but he lost me from Paterson onwards

Starmer would have had our economy in lockdown forever if he could, and it is to Johnson's credit he opened the economy when he did

That's a very silly thing to write. Starmer wanted us "in lockdown forever"?

Profoundly stupid read of the situation that isn't worthy of yours usual sage analysis.

Forever is a stretch, but Starmer was ALWAYS on the side of more and longer restrictions.

I accept forever was one of my rather exaggerated comments but there is no doubt Starmer favoured a much stricter and longer lockdown and it was Johnson who made the correct decision and it has been proven as the right thing to do

It is rather hot and I apologise for my exaggeration

Boris caused longer lockdowns by always being slow to initiate a lockdown. Had we acted promptly, we would have better controlled infection rates and could’ve come out of lockdown sooner. It’s yet more short term thinking.

Oh what nonsense. Claimed by people who want to justify lockdowns. Taking away civil liberties as a precautionary measure is unacceptable and the virus would still be prevalent on our continent after any lockdown it wasn't a magic pill that would get rid of it.

What country in Europe successfully had a short, sharp lockdown that was rapidly ended and not repeated?

I can in hindsight point at a country and say we should have done that, Sweden. Can you name any country that had a rapid premature lockdown that worked, fixed things and meant coming out of lockdown sooner?

Following the Swedish model would have been utterly catastrophic. Look at their death rates compared to their immediate neighbours. Thousands of additional people died in Sweden who did not need to because of the route they chose. And that is in spite of the fact that far more people in Sweden work from home anyway so the effects of a lockdown would have been considerably less on their economy.

Many - if not all - European countries got their policies wrong in the pandemic in one way or another. Sweden is certainly no exception.

The thousands of lives saved are people in institutions. If anything like the rest of Europe, these are places where most people have dementia and nobody is coming out alive. To sacrifice everyone's wellbeing for two years is an excessive price to pay for nursing home safety.

A completely false statement. Most of those who died were not people living in nursing homes. Of course if you are advocating just killing off older people to save money then you are welcome to make that claim but you will be treated with the contempt you deserve.

Not simply to save money. And nobody is proposing euthanasia, anyone who dies from a virus is dying from natural causes.

The NHS has never had a blank cheque and nor should it, as even others agree already.

If the cost of keeping one elderly and vulnerable person from having a death from entirely natural causes is ten million pounds and taking a thousand children out of education for six months then is it worthy of "contempt" to question whether that is an acceptable price?

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

turbotubbs said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Stuartinromford said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The problem isn't the Tory party, its the voters. People want contradictory things but refuse to accept there is a contradiction. A series of events have empowered them to believe their genuine ignorance on a subject holds the same weight as actual knowledge and experience. They aren't wrong, the experts are wrong.

There is a way through though - find us a new Blair or Thatcher, someone who does know what they are talking about and has political umph. People said "that is Boris" but as all but the remaining holdouts now accept Boris stood for nothing, with no great policies delivered and settled in his time.

Ummm, BoZo was the politician more than any other in my lifetime that told voters they could have contradictory things. Denied the contradictions. That experts were to be derided.

He was the problem

The fact his opponents failed to make their case shows how poor they were

Not entirely.

If you are in a debate with someone shameless and dishonest enough, it can be really hard to persuade an audience.

It tends to go this;

BORIS-ALIKE Something involving cake and eat it

RORY-ALIKE (because he at least tried) That's not possible- once you have eaten your cake, it's gone...

BORIS-ALIKE There you go, with your doomy gloomy negativity. Remember we are Great Britain! We are being held back by your fears... (Continues ad nauseum.)

Boris style cakeism is a really attractive prospectus. It's awfully hard to argue against, because deep down we want it to be true, and want to believe that there's some meanie stopping it being true for us. That's been the case since the apple/snake/Eve fiasco in Genesis.

It would have been better for the UK had someone successfully argued us out of Borisism, but I'm not convinced that was possible.

It would have been better for the Conservatives and the UK to have not fallen for Borisism, but that required human nature to be something it isn't.

The culpability for (gestures round) all of this belongs with the clique who proposed it, who lied to the public about it, who smeared and deposed those who questioned it.

Not particularly with those who fell for it, and certainly not with those who did their best to argue against it.

Unless you had a better plan to argue against Boris, in which case I'm all ears.

And unless he didn't vote for the Conservatives when Mr Johnson was their leader.

I want to make this clear

I supported Johnson on brexit, covid and Ukraine but he lost me from Paterson onwards

Starmer would have had our economy in lockdown forever if he could, and it is to Johnson's credit he opened the economy when he did

That's a very silly thing to write. Starmer wanted us "in lockdown forever"?

Profoundly stupid read of the situation that isn't worthy of yours usual sage analysis.

Forever is a stretch, but Starmer was ALWAYS on the side of more and longer restrictions.

I accept forever was one of my rather exaggerated comments but there is no doubt Starmer favoured a much stricter and longer lockdown and it was Johnson who made the correct decision and it has been proven as the right thing to do

It is rather hot and I apologise for my exaggeration

Boris caused longer lockdowns by always being slow to initiate a lockdown. Had we acted promptly, we would have better controlled infection rates and could’ve come out of lockdown sooner. It’s yet more short term thinking.

Oh what nonsense. Claimed by people who want to justify lockdowns. Taking away civil liberties as a precautionary measure is unacceptable and the virus would still be prevalent on our continent after any lockdown it wasn't a magic pill that would get rid of it.

What country in Europe successfully had a short, sharp lockdown that was rapidly ended and not repeated?

I can in hindsight point at a country and say we should have done that, Sweden. Can you name any country that had a rapid premature lockdown that worked, fixed things and meant coming out of lockdown sooner?

Following the Swedish model would have been utterly catastrophic. Look at their death rates compared to their immediate neighbours. Thousands of additional people died in Sweden who did not need to because of the route they chose. And that is in spite of the fact that far more people in Sweden work from home anyway so the effects of a lockdown would have been considerably less on their economy.

Many - if not all - European countries got their policies wrong in the pandemic in one way or another. Sweden is certainly no exception.

Thousands extra dying, almost all of whom would have died soon anyway, is better than stripping tens of millions of two years of civil liberties, trashing education and development for years that will have consequences for generations to come, spending hundreds of billions and creating NHS waiting lists for years to come.

The price we paid to keep people alive was not a price worth paying. There's more to life than a mortuary league table.

If the vulnerable wishes to shield that should be there prerogative but not at the price of trashing children's education etc

It is not for you to decide who has a right to live and die. I wonder if someone else were making that sort of decision but based on something other than simply age, whether you would be happy to be marked as uneconomic and unworthy of protection. I am sure we could work up a suitable argument as to why you should be sacrificed so we could all save a bit of money.

rottenborough said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

What have the Romans done for us?

At least they weren't woke.

Alistair said:

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Much like 1 picture from a dalle prompt I want to see the other 5 pictures

The retired RAF press officer, Craig Lindsay - who has kept this image for 30 years - says he has seen all six. He says they are all very similar, except the "object" is in a different place in some

Now, he could easily be a liar and he could easily be part of an elaborate hoax, but that's an odd thing to do at the end of a long career, in your 80s

To channel Mr @moonshine if this is part of Disclosure, it makes bizarre sense. The powers that be are softening us up for the final revelation, but doing it sloooooowly so we don't panic. It has now been happening for several years. Getting retired people to do it is logical, they do not have careers to damage. So maybe Craig Lindsay got a call from the RAF saying "go ahead, you can release it now"

The timing is intriguing

Thr timing being about 25-30 years since the last burst of interst in UFOs, Project Blue Book, Fortean Times type stuff?

Carnyx said:

ohnotnow said:

Carnyx said:

Fairliered said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

Do Scottish Labour have anyone of the quality of Mark Drakeford? No wonder Welsh Labour do well and Scottish Labour don’t.

They used to, at least at the top. But not since, I think, Donald Dewar and Wendy Alexander.

I had high hopes for Wendy Alexander. But she didn't really make much of a mark in the role. I don't know enough about internal SLab politics to know if she was being undermined/let-down by rival factions or was just 'not that good'.

That was a long time ago but from memory WA was widely regarded as being stabbed in the back by her friends*. Henry McLeish, her predecessor, was nominally forced out because of subletting his constituency office and forgetting to register it etc. This came out because the story emerged in a newspaper (can't recall which one). Howsoever that happened, as I recall Mr McLeish's leadership did not sit well with certain West Central Belt elements (he being from Fife).

*Edit: partly cos she wanted to take a pro-active approach and declare an indyref early, before the SNP had completely mobilised.

Alistair said:

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Much like 1 picture from a dalle prompt I want to see the other 5 pictures

The retired RAF press officer, Craig Lindsay - who has kept this image for 30 years - says he has seen all six. He says they are all very similar, except the "object" is in a different place in some

Now, he could easily be a liar and he could easily be part of an elaborate hoax, but that's an odd thing to do at the end of a long career, in your 80s

To channel Mr @moonshine if this is part of Disclosure, it makes bizarre sense. The powers that be are softening us up for the final revelation, but doing it sloooooowly so we don't panic. It has now been happening for several years. Getting retired people to do it is logical, they do not have careers to damage. So maybe Craig Lindsay got a call from the RAF saying "go ahead, you can release it now"

The timing is intriguing

Thr timing being about 25-30 years since the last burst of interst in UFOs, Project Blue Book, Fortean Times type stuff?

Luckyguy1983 said:

Those 'achievements' are a pretty sorry shopping list aren't they. Hopefully they aren't listed by order of importance - number 2 achievement being sending people cardboard boxes in which to deposit their newborns is a bit of a shocker.

StuartDickson said:

darkage said:

Fairliered said:

darkage said:

StuartDickson said:

Which European countries are most vulnerable to surging energy prices?
- It’s better to be a consumer in Sweden than Britain

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/08/11/which-european-countries-are-most-vulnerable-to-surging-energy-prices

That graph is shocking: the poorest 20% in England & her satellite states are going to get absolutely hammered compared to the richest 20%.

While the poor suffer more than the rich nearly everywhere, they are better protected in France, Italy, Germany etc

Isn't the greatest per capita consumption of energy in Scandinavia?
I am sure someone will find a graph that shows this.
Clearing the roads of snow (for hundreds and hundreds of kilometres) and heating 200-300 sqm houses favoured by the most people through minus 30 degree winters is bound to use up vast amounts of energy, mainly oil and gas.
It seems to me like, if you go through Sweden or Finland - which I have done a lot; much of it is actually also suburban sprawl. They have never built to any density because of the unlimited supply of land.
This sprawl just goes on for miles. House after house (200-300 sqm) with 3-4 cars.
Also... limited use of public transport. So the trains are empty and cost little or nothing to use. And lots are actually diesel.
Even busses - massively subsidised and good, but not used all that much .. not on anything like the density in the UK.
Because of the disparate suburban planning over the past decades , things like shopping centres and swimming pools are located out of centre.
So to get from A to B by bus, even though its possible, it takes an hour to to a journey that takes 15 minutes by car.
Outside the progressive cities with new apartment blocks and townhouse style developments, it seems like people are driving everywhere and aspiring to live to these timber framed modernist mansions.
I don't see how that can all be improved particularly.

So even if you have redistributive policies in Sweden, it won't correct a more fundamental problem which will take a lot longer to resolve.
By contrast, countries like the UK could adopt redistributive policies a lot more quickly and painlessly.

We have PB Scotch Experts. Now we have a PB Swedish Expert telling someone who lives in Sweden what living in Sweden is like. PB, there’s nothing like it!

Yeah, well firstly, you don't know anything about me and what I may or not know about Sweden.
Secondly the poster just suggested that the country with the second highest per capita consumption of energy in the EU (IE Sweden) was a good country to be a consumer, when raw energy prices are rising very significantly.
It is perfectly reasonable to point out in response that Sweden has an objective problem with consumption, even if the impact may be masked by redistributive policies.

Huh? It wasn’t me who said that, it was The Economist. Hint: click the link.

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Go back and have a look at the Better Together materials. And compare that with your argument now.

I am looking at the result.

In 2014, they voted to stay in the EU.

In 2016, they voted to stay in the EU.

Which result are you disputing?

Not the result - but your interpretation of the 2014 result. In view of it being clear SNP policy to stay in the EU. It ill behoves you to ally with the Brexiters of this world.

Fairliered said:

That’s the sort of list you would think a Labour party would want to implement. However, Scottish Labour opposed most of them.

darkage said:

StuartDickson said:

darkage said:

Fairliered said:

darkage said:

StuartDickson said:

Which European countries are most vulnerable to surging energy prices?
- It’s better to be a consumer in Sweden than Britain

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/08/11/which-european-countries-are-most-vulnerable-to-surging-energy-prices

That graph is shocking: the poorest 20% in England & her satellite states are going to get absolutely hammered compared to the richest 20%.

While the poor suffer more than the rich nearly everywhere, they are better protected in France, Italy, Germany etc

Isn't the greatest per capita consumption of energy in Scandinavia?
I am sure someone will find a graph that shows this.
Clearing the roads of snow (for hundreds and hundreds of kilometres) and heating 200-300 sqm houses favoured by the most people through minus 30 degree winters is bound to use up vast amounts of energy, mainly oil and gas.
It seems to me like, if you go through Sweden or Finland - which I have done a lot; much of it is actually also suburban sprawl. They have never built to any density because of the unlimited supply of land.
This sprawl just goes on for miles. House after house (200-300 sqm) with 3-4 cars.
Also... limited use of public transport. So the trains are empty and cost little or nothing to use. And lots are actually diesel.
Even busses - massively subsidised and good, but not used all that much .. not on anything like the density in the UK.
Because of the disparate suburban planning over the past decades , things like shopping centres and swimming pools are located out of centre.
So to get from A to B by bus, even though its possible, it takes an hour to to a journey that takes 15 minutes by car.
Outside the progressive cities with new apartment blocks and townhouse style developments, it seems like people are driving everywhere and aspiring to live to these timber framed modernist mansions.
I don't see how that can all be improved particularly.

So even if you have redistributive policies in Sweden, it won't correct a more fundamental problem which will take a lot longer to resolve.
By contrast, countries like the UK could adopt redistributive policies a lot more quickly and painlessly.

We have PB Scotch Experts. Now we have a PB Swedish Expert telling someone who lives in Sweden what living in Sweden is like. PB, there’s nothing like it!

Yeah, well firstly, you don't know anything about me and what I may or not know about Sweden.
Secondly the poster just suggested that the country with the second highest per capita consumption of energy in the EU (IE Sweden) was a good country to be a consumer, when raw energy prices are rising very significantly.
It is perfectly reasonable to point out in response that Sweden has an objective problem with consumption, even if the impact may be masked by redistributive policies.

Huh? It wasn’t me who said that, it was The Economist. Hint: click the link.

Yes... but you were agreeing with it.
Leaving this aside, I would be interested in your thoughts about energy consumption in Sweden.
Am I right or wrong in my basic analysis of the problem?

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Much like 1 picture from a dalle prompt I want to see the other 5 pictures

The retired RAF press officer, Craig Lindsay - who has kept this image for 30 years - says he has seen all six. He says they are all very similar, except the "object" is in a different place in some

Now, he could easily be a liar and he could easily be part of an elaborate hoax, but that's an odd thing to do at the end of a long career, in your 80s

To channel Mr @moonshine if this is part of Disclosure, it makes bizarre sense. The powers that be are softening us up for the final revelation, but doing it sloooooowly so we don't panic. It has now been happening for several years. Getting retired people to do it is logical, they do not have careers to damage. So maybe Craig Lindsay got a call from the RAF saying "go ahead, you can release it now"

The timing is intriguing

Thr timing being about 25-30 years since the last burst of interst in UFOs, Project Blue Book, Fortean Times type stuff?

Is it 25-30 years? Dunno

I had almost zero interest in UFOs until @moonshine alerted me to the fact something genuinely odd was happening, UFO-wise, over in America, with ex presidents, CIA chiefs, NASA chiefs, senators, FBI dudes, generals, admirals, and more, all suddenly saying Yeah there is something up there and we don't know what it is

This surreal behaviour remains the most interesting anomalous phenomenon of all, absent a video of an alien buggering an elk

Fairliered said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

That’s the sort of list you would think a Labour party would want to implement. However, Scottish Labour opposed most of them.

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Go back and have a look at the Better Together materials. And compare that with your argument now.

I am looking at the result.

In 2014, they voted to stay in the EU.

In 2016, they voted to stay in the EU.

Which result are you disputing?

Not the result - but your interpretation of the 2014 result. In view of it being clear SNP policy to stay in the EU. It ill behoves you to ally with the Brexiters of this world.

It may have been "SNP policy" to stay in the EU - was it? I just remember the SNP mumbling about it and swiftly moving the question on - but you know full well that a YES vote would have meant instant ejection from the EU, then reapplication by iScotland as a new country, years later, negotiating its own fishing policies, sorting out its new commissioner, its MEPs and so on

The EU is legalistic. Brussels doesn't just shrug and say ah fuck it, a 29th country, whatever, in you come. That's not how accession works. The process would have been painful and technical, and maybe even hostile if Spain was so minded (to teach the Catalans)

Eliding or denying this is beneath you

It was very much the position of the Unionists that voting No to indy was the only way to stay in the EU. And then we had 2016. Which wrecks your argument.

rottenborough said:

This'll give Truss ideas...

Visegrád 24
@visegrad24
·
4h
Finnish Prime Minister Sanna Marin (left) preparing to take the stage at the Flow Music Festival in Helsinki.

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1558393927245484042

MarqueeMark said:

Carnyx said:

rottenborough said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

What have the Romans done for us?

At least they weren't woke.

You sure? Even bloody tables were declared female. Edit: more precisely, 'feminine'. Though they had a neuter gender as well. Would be useful today.

I think their enthusiastic embracing of slavery probably rules the Romans out from being very woke.....

BartholomewRoberts said:

darkage said:

StuartDickson said:

darkage said:

Fairliered said:

darkage said:

StuartDickson said:

Which European countries are most vulnerable to surging energy prices?
- It’s better to be a consumer in Sweden than Britain

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/08/11/which-european-countries-are-most-vulnerable-to-surging-energy-prices

That graph is shocking: the poorest 20% in England & her satellite states are going to get absolutely hammered compared to the richest 20%.

While the poor suffer more than the rich nearly everywhere, they are better protected in France, Italy, Germany etc

Isn't the greatest per capita consumption of energy in Scandinavia?
I am sure someone will find a graph that shows this.
Clearing the roads of snow (for hundreds and hundreds of kilometres) and heating 200-300 sqm houses favoured by the most people through minus 30 degree winters is bound to use up vast amounts of energy, mainly oil and gas.
It seems to me like, if you go through Sweden or Finland - which I have done a lot; much of it is actually also suburban sprawl. They have never built to any density because of the unlimited supply of land.
This sprawl just goes on for miles. House after house (200-300 sqm) with 3-4 cars.
Also... limited use of public transport. So the trains are empty and cost little or nothing to use. And lots are actually diesel.
Even busses - massively subsidised and good, but not used all that much .. not on anything like the density in the UK.
Because of the disparate suburban planning over the past decades , things like shopping centres and swimming pools are located out of centre.
So to get from A to B by bus, even though its possible, it takes an hour to to a journey that takes 15 minutes by car.
Outside the progressive cities with new apartment blocks and townhouse style developments, it seems like people are driving everywhere and aspiring to live to these timber framed modernist mansions.
I don't see how that can all be improved particularly.

So even if you have redistributive policies in Sweden, it won't correct a more fundamental problem which will take a lot longer to resolve.
By contrast, countries like the UK could adopt redistributive policies a lot more quickly and painlessly.

We have PB Scotch Experts. Now we have a PB Swedish Expert telling someone who lives in Sweden what living in Sweden is like. PB, there’s nothing like it!

Yeah, well firstly, you don't know anything about me and what I may or not know about Sweden.
Secondly the poster just suggested that the country with the second highest per capita consumption of energy in the EU (IE Sweden) was a good country to be a consumer, when raw energy prices are rising very significantly.
It is perfectly reasonable to point out in response that Sweden has an objective problem with consumption, even if the impact may be masked by redistributive policies.

Huh? It wasn’t me who said that, it was The Economist. Hint: click the link.

Yes... but you were agreeing with it.
Leaving this aside, I would be interested in your thoughts about energy consumption in Sweden.
Am I right or wrong in my basic analysis of the problem?

You could be wrong.

Simply saying that people in a country rely upon more energy doesn't mean they're automatically more vulnerable to swings in gas prices specifically.

If their energy demands aren't coupled to gas price levels, eg because hypothetically they use hydroelectric power instead of gas, then that'd make them less vulnerable.

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Go back and have a look at the Better Together materials. And compare that with your argument now.

I am looking at the result.

In 2014, they voted to stay in the EU.

In 2016, they voted to stay in the EU.

Which result are you disputing?

Not the result - but your interpretation of the 2014 result. In view of it being clear SNP policy to stay in the EU. It ill behoves you to ally with the Brexiters of this world.

It may have been "SNP policy" to stay in the EU - was it? I just remember the SNP mumbling about it and swiftly moving the question on - but you know full well that a YES vote would have meant instant ejection from the EU, then reapplication by iScotland as a new country, years later, negotiating its own fishing policies, sorting out its new commissioner, its MEPs and so on

The EU is legalistic. Brussels doesn't just shrug and say ah fuck it, a 29th country, whatever, in you come. That's not how accession works. The process would have been painful and technical, and maybe even hostile if Spain was so minded (to teach the Catalans)

Eliding or denying this is beneath you

It was very much the position of the Unionists that voting No to indy was the only way to stay in the EU. And then we had 2016. Which wrecks your argument.

Carnyx said:

ydoethur said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Go back and have a look at the Better Together materials. And compare that with your argument now.

I am looking at the result.

In 2014, they voted to stay in the EU.

In 2016, they voted to stay in the EU.

Which result are you disputing?

Not the result - but your interpretation of the 2014 result. In view of it being clear SNP policy to stay in the EU. It ill behoves you to ally with the Brexiters of this world.

It doesn't matter what the SNP policy was. Leaving the UK would have meant leaving the EU. Sure, they could have applied for entry after leaving, but however fast it happened it wouldn't have been instant.

Yes, it is fair to say that the 'No' campaign oversold the likelihood of Britain staying in the EU, but the SNP simply lied. And it wasn't even a clever lie.

But independence would not have been instant, either. There wouldk hasve been a transition period. So your logic isn't working.

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

Carnyx said:

rottenborough said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

What have the Romans done for us?

At least they weren't woke.

You sure? Even bloody tables were declared female. Edit: more precisely, 'feminine'. Though they had a neuter gender as well. Would be useful today.

I think their enthusiastic embracing of slavery probably rules the Romans out from being very woke.....

Although they weren't racist. You were a Roman, or you weren't. If you were a Roman, regardless of the colour of your skin you could go all the way to the top. If you weren't you were buggered (usually literally).

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Leon said:

Alistair said:

Much like 1 picture from a dalle prompt I want to see the other 5 pictures

The retired RAF press officer, Craig Lindsay - who has kept this image for 30 years - says he has seen all six. He says they are all very similar, except the "object" is in a different place in some

Now, he could easily be a liar and he could easily be part of an elaborate hoax, but that's an odd thing to do at the end of a long career, in your 80s

To channel Mr @moonshine if this is part of Disclosure, it makes bizarre sense. The powers that be are softening us up for the final revelation, but doing it sloooooowly so we don't panic. It has now been happening for several years. Getting retired people to do it is logical, they do not have careers to damage. So maybe Craig Lindsay got a call from the RAF saying "go ahead, you can release it now"

The timing is intriguing

Thr timing being about 25-30 years since the last burst of interst in UFOs, Project Blue Book, Fortean Times type stuff?

Is it 25-30 years? Dunno

I had almost zero interest in UFOs until @moonshine alerted me to the fact something genuinely odd was happening, UFO-wise, over in America, with ex presidents, CIA chiefs, NASA chiefs, senators, FBI dudes, generals, admirals, and more, all suddenly saying Yeah there is something up there and we don't know what it is

This surreal behaviour remains the most interesting anomalous phenomenon of all, absent a video of an alien buggering an elk

darkage said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Scandinavia: Norway get 90% of its electricity from renewables. Sweden is a little less, but mostly because they are about 20-25% nuclear.

It does look like Norway and Sweden are in a pretty good position (aside from reliance on fossil fuels for transportation). Finland and Estonia the situation is a lot more problematic because they don't have anything near the same capacity with renewables.

rcs1000 said:

darkage said:

rcs1000 said:

Re Scandinavia: Norway get 90% of its electricity from renewables. Sweden is a little less, but mostly because they are about 20-25% nuclear.

It does look like Norway and Sweden are in a pretty good position (aside from reliance on fossil fuels for transportation). Finland and Estonia the situation is a lot more problematic because they don't have anything near the same capacity with renewables.

Norway has one of the most electrified transport systems (i.e. electric cars) in the world, so they are quite well protected there too.

ydoethur said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Go back and have a look at the Better Together materials. And compare that with your argument now.

I am looking at the result.

In 2014, they voted to stay in the EU.

In 2016, they voted to stay in the EU.

Which result are you disputing?

Not the result - but your interpretation of the 2014 result. In view of it being clear SNP policy to stay in the EU. It ill behoves you to ally with the Brexiters of this world.

It may have been "SNP policy" to stay in the EU - was it? I just remember the SNP mumbling about it and swiftly moving the question on - but you know full well that a YES vote would have meant instant ejection from the EU, then reapplication by iScotland as a new country, years later, negotiating its own fishing policies, sorting out its new commissioner, its MEPs and so on

The EU is legalistic. Brussels doesn't just shrug and say ah fuck it, a 29th country, whatever, in you come. That's not how accession works. The process would have been painful and technical, and maybe even hostile if Spain was so minded (to teach the Catalans)

Eliding or denying this is beneath you

It was very much the position of the Unionists that voting No to indy was the only way to stay in the EU. And then we had 2016. Which wrecks your argument.

Well, it was.

That it wasn't a guarantee of staying in the EU should have been made clearer, and I said that at the time even though I fully expected Britain to vote Remain in any referendum.

There were two ways for Scotland to leave the EU, and one to stay in. The first way to leave was if they voted for independence. The second was if they didn't vote for independence but Britain at a later date left the EU. The only way to stay in was to vote against independence *and* for Britain to stay in the EU (which it might well have done if turnout in Scotland had been as high as in England).

MarqueeMark said:

Carnyx said:

rottenborough said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

StuartDickson said:

CorrectHorseBattery said:

Stuart and co fear Starmer because he'd run a good Government which would blunt the need for independence.

Perhaps the SNP should propose some policies and we can look at them. Their record in Government is a dismal failure.

Propose policies? Ho ho. There speaks someone firmly locked in Opposition Mode. FYI the SNP have been in government for fifteen years, and have now won eleven elections in a row. Lots of policies implemented and approved at the ballot box.

Welsh Labour, the only one in power, is closer to the SNP than Scottish or English Labour. Anas Sarwar would recoil in horror at some of the things Mark Drakeford says and does. Drakeford is riding high in the polls. Sarwar isn’t.

SNP have done sod all, if they had done anything you'd be able to point out achievements

Says the PB Scotch expert. You Labourites are just as bad as your Tory buddies.

Queensferry Crossing

Child Payment Baby Box

Free bus travel for under 22s

Free period products

Dentistry charges scrapped

Music tuition fees scrapped

Best Performing NHS in the UK

Extended free personal care

Record high health funding

A dozen new Social Security benefits

Free school meals for P1-3s

Best performing A&E in the UK

Record high investment in education

Declared a climate emergency - 1st in world

Planting 22 million trees a year

Scottish National Investment Bank

Building more affordable homes

Small Business Bonus

Expanded MA scheme

Expanded EMAS

School Clothing Grant

Young Person's Guarantee

Investing more in life sciences

Free eye tests

Record support for college students

New progressive tax system

Carer's Allowance Supplement

Record low crime - lowest in over 40 years

Young Carer Grant

Violence Reduction Unit

Record investment in active travel

Best Start Grant

Aberdeen Bypass

Driving forward land reform

Lowering emissions

More investment in Climate Justice Fund

National Islands Plan

Community Empowerment Act

National Marine Plan

Helping deliver COP26

Outperforming UK on foreign investment

Continuing to outperform UK on productivity

Delivering Equally Safe Fund

First gender neutral cabinet in the UK

Keeping Scottish Water in public hands

Ferguson's shipyard jobs saved

BiFab saved

Prestwick Airport saved

Violent crime down

Weapon/knife crime significantly down

Handling the Covid crisis

What have the Romans done for us?

At least they weren't woke.

You sure? Even bloody tables were declared female. Edit: more precisely, 'feminine'. Though they had a neuter gender as well. Would be useful today.

I think their enthusiastic embracing of slavery probably rules the Romans out from being very woke.....

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

EPG said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

bondegezou said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

turbotubbs said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Carnyx said:

Stuartinromford said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

RochdalePioneers said:

The problem isn't the Tory party, its the voters. People want contradictory things but refuse to accept there is a contradiction. A series of events have empowered them to believe their genuine ignorance on a subject holds the same weight as actual knowledge and experience. They aren't wrong, the experts are wrong.

There is a way through though - find us a new Blair or Thatcher, someone who does know what they are talking about and has political umph. People said "that is Boris" but as all but the remaining holdouts now accept Boris stood for nothing, with no great policies delivered and settled in his time.

Ummm, BoZo was the politician more than any other in my lifetime that told voters they could have contradictory things. Denied the contradictions. That experts were to be derided.

He was the problem

The fact his opponents failed to make their case shows how poor they were

Not entirely.

If you are in a debate with someone shameless and dishonest enough, it can be really hard to persuade an audience.

It tends to go this;

BORIS-ALIKE Something involving cake and eat it

RORY-ALIKE (because he at least tried) That's not possible- once you have eaten your cake, it's gone...

BORIS-ALIKE There you go, with your doomy gloomy negativity. Remember we are Great Britain! We are being held back by your fears... (Continues ad nauseum.)

Boris style cakeism is a really attractive prospectus. It's awfully hard to argue against, because deep down we want it to be true, and want to believe that there's some meanie stopping it being true for us. That's been the case since the apple/snake/Eve fiasco in Genesis.

It would have been better for the UK had someone successfully argued us out of Borisism, but I'm not convinced that was possible.

It would have been better for the Conservatives and the UK to have not fallen for Borisism, but that required human nature to be something it isn't.

The culpability for (gestures round) all of this belongs with the clique who proposed it, who lied to the public about it, who smeared and deposed those who questioned it.

Not particularly with those who fell for it, and certainly not with those who did their best to argue against it.

Unless you had a better plan to argue against Boris, in which case I'm all ears.

And unless he didn't vote for the Conservatives when Mr Johnson was their leader.

I want to make this clear

I supported Johnson on brexit, covid and Ukraine but he lost me from Paterson onwards

Starmer would have had our economy in lockdown forever if he could, and it is to Johnson's credit he opened the economy when he did

That's a very silly thing to write. Starmer wanted us "in lockdown forever"?

Profoundly stupid read of the situation that isn't worthy of yours usual sage analysis.

Forever is a stretch, but Starmer was ALWAYS on the side of more and longer restrictions.

I accept forever was one of my rather exaggerated comments but there is no doubt Starmer favoured a much stricter and longer lockdown and it was Johnson who made the correct decision and it has been proven as the right thing to do

It is rather hot and I apologise for my exaggeration

Boris caused longer lockdowns by always being slow to initiate a lockdown. Had we acted promptly, we would have better controlled infection rates and could’ve come out of lockdown sooner. It’s yet more short term thinking.

Oh what nonsense. Claimed by people who want to justify lockdowns. Taking away civil liberties as a precautionary measure is unacceptable and the virus would still be prevalent on our continent after any lockdown it wasn't a magic pill that would get rid of it.

What country in Europe successfully had a short, sharp lockdown that was rapidly ended and not repeated?

I can in hindsight point at a country and say we should have done that, Sweden. Can you name any country that had a rapid premature lockdown that worked, fixed things and meant coming out of lockdown sooner?

Following the Swedish model would have been utterly catastrophic. Look at their death rates compared to their immediate neighbours. Thousands of additional people died in Sweden who did not need to because of the route they chose. And that is in spite of the fact that far more people in Sweden work from home anyway so the effects of a lockdown would have been considerably less on their economy.

Many - if not all - European countries got their policies wrong in the pandemic in one way or another. Sweden is certainly no exception.

The thousands of lives saved are people in institutions. If anything like the rest of Europe, these are places where most people have dementia and nobody is coming out alive. To sacrifice everyone's wellbeing for two years is an excessive price to pay for nursing home safety.

A completely false statement. Most of those who died were not people living in nursing homes. Of course if you are advocating just killing off older people to save money then you are welcome to make that claim but you will be treated with the contempt you deserve.

Not simply to save money. And nobody is proposing euthanasia, anyone who dies from a virus is dying from natural causes.

The NHS has never had a blank cheque and nor should it, as even others agree already.

If the cost of keeping one elderly and vulnerable person from having a death from entirely natural causes is ten million pounds and taking a thousand children out of education for six months then is it worthy of "contempt" to question whether that is an acceptable price?

Just stick your granny outside in the snow. If she dies of the cold then it is because of natural causes.

Twat.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

About the elderly our 8 year old grandson said to his Grandma a couple of days ago. 'How old are you Grandma?' When she replied 'I am 82' his face showed great concern as it is not on his agenda that his Grandma would not always be there for him

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

About the elderly our 8 year old grandson said to his Grandma a couple of days ago. 'How old are you Grandma?' When she replied 'I am 82' his face showed great concern as it is not on his agenda that his Grandma would not always be there for him

A bit harsh to describe an 8 year old as elderly. I know they start early these days.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

About the elderly our 8 year old grandson said to his Grandma a couple of days ago. 'How old are you Grandma?' When she replied 'I am 82' his face showed great concern as it is not on his agenda that his Grandma would not always be there for him

A bit harsh to describe an 8 year old as elderly. I know they start early these days.

He is a very wise young man and I am sure you understand my point

Scott_xP said:

Yesterday I interviewed Chancellor of the Exchequer Nadhim Zahawi.

I challenged him over the decision to class HS2 as an England & Wales project, despite the fact none of HS2 is in Wales.

They ended the interview after I pressed him on it.

Let's look at what he said:

Thread
https://twitter.com/WillHayCardiff/status/1558445762870394880

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

About the elderly our 8 year old grandson said to his Grandma a couple of days ago. 'How old are you Grandma?' When she replied 'I am 82' his face showed great concern as it is not on his agenda that his Grandma would not always be there for him

A bit harsh to describe an 8 year old as elderly. I know they start early these days.

He is a very wise young man and I am sure you understand my point

Is he a 'G' - down the family name line, and inheriting the castle? ( I know you don't have a castle)

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

About the elderly our 8 year old grandson said to his Grandma a couple of days ago. 'How old are you Grandma?' When she replied 'I am 82' his face showed great concern as it is not on his agenda that his Grandma would not always be there for him

A bit harsh to describe an 8 year old as elderly. I know they start early these days.

He is a very wise young man and I am sure you understand my point

Is he a 'G' - down the family name line, and inheriting the castle? ( I know you don't have a castle)