take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
The main change for me in 2023 was moving to a situation where my family have two homes, a flat in the south east of the UK and an old wooden house in Finland. We have been travelling between the two. The total cost of all travel, including working one day a week in the office in London and flying to and from Finland is less than an annual season ticket to travel in to London every day from our house in England cost me in 2014. The schooling and quality of life and overall social system is far better in Finland but the weather and landscape is in my view preferable in England despite Finland being beautiful in its own way. The total cost of the two homes combined was less than a family house in England and the running costs are manageable but I shouldn't pretend that it wasn't all basically made possible by inheritance. The main purpose of living like this was to put my son in to the Finnish school system which has worked out well but obviously it comes with other challenges.
Whilst I have been negative about Covid and mass immigration a lot the main positive of these two factors was a shift to remote working that made all this possible, I've got colleagues online in Egypt and Nicaragua. It is minus 15 here in Finland and I have been out shovelling snow. About to go to buy some beers before the 9pm licensing cut off.
How v interesting. Can we ask how you managed the visa situation?
My wife and I have decided to do another 12-18 months in New York. The kids are happy here - happier than they were in London but admittedly it was a Covid-blighted London.
I miss the UK and while I fiercely love certain things about the US, there are other things I don’t think I could ever totally reconcile myself to.
It‘a hard being an immigrant. This is my third country of residence. Where, really, is home?
Quite complex and with some possibly unresolved grey areas... but in summary we are dual EU nationals so the issues fall away. It is a bit different for us because my wife is Finnish and very rooted here. I did work out that I could never completely 'leave' England for various reasons largely to do with family and work so we came up with this solution. I've learned to be ok with travelling around and being on the move whereas my wife and son prefer to spend longer periods in each place. My son now has two sets of friends, one in England and one in Finland, two lots of birthday parties to attend etc so a lot of forward planning needed. In Finland they are not that worried about him missing school the way they were in England. Most of the year the flights on Ryanair are about £30 each way.
Sounds like a nice arrangement, I envy you your EU passports. 🇪🇺
Yeah, I realise it is an enviable arrangement and don't take it for granted. Sorting it out took many years and cost thousands of pounds though - just to continue the rights we had in early 2016.
I’m just happy the French have legislated to allow British second home owners to get a simple 6 month visa.
Completely discriminatory law, but suits me.
Don’t you have young-ish kids? Perhaps I get you mixed up slightly with @OnlyLivingBoy
Education keeps me tethered more than anything else.
Yes, youngish kids, as does OLB. But it’s not long until one of them is a free living adult.
What if the markets take fright at these tax cuts? What then?
Different scenario. The Lizaster had just been appointed PM with a couple of years left to run. Rishi would have weeks left to run. The markets would express their alarm, effectively back Labour, and wait.
No, I think unfunded tax cuts would do to the markets exactly what they did in September 2022.
The Bank of England's bond flog-off dwarved any 'unfunded' tax cuts in fiscal terms. Under the Treasury's commitment to indemnify the Bank against it's losses, what had been announced the day before the minibudget was set to cost the Treasury over £80bn (it has cost more in the event). Any marketeers paying attention would have noted that fact.
So on the day of the Treasury's announcement, day before the mini-budget, GBP gained slightly against the USD; on the day of the budget it lost 3% against the USD.
Those markets were a bit slow to react to the Treasury announcement, what kept them?
There are various reasons for a delayed (very slightly delayed) market response to the BOE announcement, but that's not something I even need to explain to defend my argument. You state that 'unfunded tax cuts' spooked the markets. From memory, there were about £40bn of tax cuts in the mini budget. Within the BOE announcement, there was £80bn of 'unfunded' cost to the exchequer. That's just comparing apples and apples - a completely separate issue from any impact on the market price of UK bonds based on the fact that their biggest holder and purchaser had decided to divest.
You continually misunderstand d this. It’s not a “loss” in the normal sense
Basically these bonds were bought will printed money.
They are being sold for less than they were bought for.
All that means is that the money supply will have permanently expanded rather than been fully sterilised
No, you continually misunderstand this. The Government is committed to funding the Bank's losses on its bond sales at the Treasury's expense. That's real taxpayer's (and borrowed) money being paid over each month and it is therefore directly comparable to the impact of public spending or tax cuts on the public finances.
The borrowed money is coming from the Bank of England.
I do this for a living. What do you do?
I'm a Marketing Manager for SMEs. I'm good at my job and proud of what I do. Perhaps my lack of professional experience in this area is why I have done my homework, whereas you have not. The borrowed money being remitted to the Bank is being borrowed on the international money markets; it is not coming from the Bank of England, or what would be the point of the entire exercise?
Everything I have said on this subject is entirely valid, the Bank bung is public spending drawn from the same pot as hospitals, HS2 and cuts in tax.
Furthermore, apeals to your own expertise have no bearing on the discussion except to invalidate your own arguments.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Last year marked the bicentenary of the medical journal The Lancet, first published in October 1823. The Lancet was one of the world’s first medical journals, only outranked by the New England Journal Medicine (which dates from 1812). The first editor of The Lancet, the surgeon Thomas Wakley (later Sir Thomas Wakley) took it upon himself to expose frauds and quackery in medical practice.
Wakley subsequently became a member of parliament, and it was at his instigation that the Medical Act 1858 passed into law, laying the way to the creation of the General Medical Council (GMC). The purpose of the act, set out in the opening sentence of the legislation is to ensure that ‘Persons requiring Medical Aid should be enabled to distinguish qualified from unqualified Practitioners’.
The problem which the Medical Act of 1858 was intended to solve was not a new one. In 1518, King Henry VIII established the Royal College of Physicians, and in its founding charter gave the College the power to determine who could, and who could not, call themselves a physician.
In the last twenty years, successive governments, aware of the relentless increase in workload of the NHS, have promised more doctors. A number of new medical schools have been created, but no one seems to have addressed the unendurable pressure of work, the intolerable conditions of service, and declining remuneration. The inevitable result is that doctors retire early, emigrate, choose other careers, or move to the private sector. The number of doctors fails to increase.
Rather than attend to the obvious solution and take more care of the doctors, the government’s idea has been to flood the NHS with bogus doctors, dressed up with the title Physician Associate. They have no medical qualifications, but seem remarkably keen to ‘have a go’; whether patients appreciate that they are not qualified doctors is open to doubt. Already we are hearing of the inevitable consequences.
In December 2023, on a conveniently busy day for news, the government sneaked through parliament a change in the GMC’s duties, which placed upon them the duty of registering the Physician Associates. In turn, the GMC has asked the Royal College of Physicians to be responsible for the training of these new ‘gimcracks’. The story has received remarkably little coverage in the press.
The problems of medical manpower can be solved by giving us the resources to work efficiently; better IT and secretarial support would be a start, together with less managerial interference. The answer isn’t to appoint Potemkin doctors.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Indeed
No man is an island, Entire of itself. Each is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less. As well as if a promontory were. As well as if a manor of thine own Or of thine friend's were. Each man's death diminishes me, For I am involved in mankind. Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
covid changed things. for the people needing to shield most, beforehand they'd be able to spend most of the summer not worrying too much about flu/colds. Covid is spread year round.
there are a number of people (I know a couple) who are being more cautious than they possibly need but even with the vaccines, and assuming they can have them, they get less benefit from them for a shorter period.
The whole point of vaccines is to prevent the spread of diseases to protect those that can't have the vaccine.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
Died unaware of viral risk in many cases, possibly ?
I’d probably just carry on taking my chances, FWIW, but I can equally see that some would choose otherwise.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
Last year marked the bicentenary of the medical journal The Lancet, first published in October 1823. The Lancet was one of the world’s first medical journals, only outranked by the New England Journal Medicine (which dates from 1812). The first editor of The Lancet, the surgeon Thomas Wakley (later Sir Thomas Wakley) took it upon himself to expose frauds and quackery in medical practice.
Wakley subsequently became a member of parliament, and it was at his instigation that the Medical Act 1858 passed into law, laying the way to the creation of the General Medical Council (GMC). The purpose of the act, set out in the opening sentence of the legislation is to ensure that ‘Persons requiring Medical Aid should be enabled to distinguish qualified from unqualified Practitioners’.
The problem which the Medical Act of 1858 was intended to solve was not a new one. In 1518, King Henry VIII established the Royal College of Physicians, and in its founding charter gave the College the power to determine who could, and who could not, call themselves a physician.
In the last twenty years, successive governments, aware of the relentless increase in workload of the NHS, have promised more doctors. A number of new medical schools have been created, but no one seems to have addressed the unendurable pressure of work, the intolerable conditions of service, and declining remuneration. The inevitable result is that doctors retire early, emigrate, choose other careers, or move to the private sector. The number of doctors fails to increase.
Rather than attend to the obvious solution and take more care of the doctors, the government’s idea has been to flood the NHS with bogus doctors, dressed up with the title Physician Associate. They have no medical qualifications, but seem remarkably keen to ‘have a go’; whether patients appreciate that they are not qualified doctors is open to doubt. Already we are hearing of the inevitable consequences.
In December 2023, on a conveniently busy day for news, the government sneaked through parliament a change in the GMC’s duties, which placed upon them the duty of registering the Physician Associates. In turn, the GMC has asked the Royal College of Physicians to be responsible for the training of these new ‘gimcracks’. The story has received remarkably little coverage in the press.
The problems of medical manpower can be solved by giving us the resources to work efficiently; better IT and secretarial support would be a start, together with less managerial interference. The answer isn’t to appoint Potemkin doctors.
This is somewhat I’ll informed. The PA’s will have degrees and undertake postgraduate training in the role. I agree with the issues around doctor retention, but to attack PA’s is not right. I suppose you don’t think nurses should be able to prescribe drugs, or pharmacists, but suitably qualified nurses and pharmacist do this now, and all pharmacists who graduate from 2025 on will be able to prescribe. It’s well worth challenging ways of operating all the time. My favourite example is this. During my leukaemia treatment I had bloods taken on a regular basis. Phlebotomists do this all day every day and had no issues. A doctor who had taken my bone marrow sample proceeded to try 5 (yes five!) places to get some peripheral bloods. I know who I wanted to take the blood…
I’m not a rock guy, but it’s it basically that the fertile Thames and Severn Valleys promoted a Tory squirearchy, and the rocky uplands of everywhere else…did not? Look at the distribution of Church of England parishes, among other things.
Basically, the Severn-Wash line, give or take.
I haven’t quite worked out why Essex and Kent are so relatively Brexity, though. The Kentish Weald is not terribly fertile (was ironworks, not hops), but I don’t think that translates. Essex, former dairying country, should be more comfortable, should it not?
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
They had problems - but with COVID, for some people is as it was when Italian medical services were collapsing and all the flint knappers were running for Cornwall.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
covid changed things. for the people needing to shield most, beforehand they'd be able to spend most of the summer not worrying too much about flu/colds. Covid is spread year round.
there are a number of people (I know a couple) who are being more cautious than they possibly need but even with the vaccines, and assuming they can have them, they get less benefit from them for a shorter period.
The whole point of vaccines is to prevent the spread of diseases to protect those that can't have the vaccine.
I’m not a rock guy, but it’s it basically that the fertile Thames and Severn Valleys promoted a Tory squirearchy, and the rocky uplands of everywhere else…did not? Look at the distribution of Church of England parishes, among other things.
Basically, the Severn-Wash line, give or take.
I haven’t quite worked out why Essex and Kent are so relatively Brexity, though. The Kentish Weald is not terribly fertile (was ironworks, not hops), but I don’t think that translates. Essex, former dairying country, should be more comfortable, should it not?
Eastern England was the cradle of the Cromwellians. It has always had this “stout yeoman” Roundhead rebel streak. And Essex is notoriously insurgent
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
Died unaware of viral risk in many cases, possibly ?
I’d probably just carry on taking my chances, FWIW, but I can equally see that some would choose otherwise.
We all make health choices, all the time. I would never eat food from an establishment without the highest hygiene rating, for instance. It cannot have been a great time for people who needed to shield, and perhaps still feel the need too.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
They had problems - but with COVID, for some people is as it was when Italian medical services were collapsing and all the flint knappers were running for Cornwall.
take it as it comes, if it's too much ask for help.
this is truly the first year I've been looking forward to since before the pandemic. following the pandemic everything got too much for me and I fell apart mentally in 2022. I've spent this year making changes and putting myself back together again. I'm looking forward to moving on next year. Hopefully I can leave the past alone from here on out.
Good luck, bro!
A lot of us were scarred by Covid. I only really moved on late last year, the autumn of 2022
Many are still there. The other day, down in Cornwall for Chrimbo, I messaged a very old friend in Padstow that I haven't seen since pre-pandemic, I suggested a drink and a long overdue catch up
He answered "Sure, briliant, I know a good pub, but it will have to be outside, we are still shielding"
WTAFFFF
I did some research and found out this is true. This person has been "shielding" since 2020 and has not stopped. No one has been inside their house. We are on the cusp of 2024. Will it be like this for the rest of his life?
How many others are like that?
I never saw my friend. It rained like fuck and I am not gonna stand outside a pub in the rain talking to someone in a frigging mask
Now is not a stupid time to shield, if you are immunocompromised. Covid is definitely going through one of its waves, and while that's no big deal for those of us with healthy immune systems, and who have been jabbed and infected, it might well be for the old and the sick.
Perhaps
But my point is, this person has been shielding perpetually since lockdown 1. Never stopped
What kind of life is that?
Is the risk from Covid any higher than anything else going around at the moment? I was talking to a nurse yesterday and she said that even though they were still doing daily testing (because they work with vulnerable patients) she wasn't aware of covid related ICU admissions in the local hospital. Lots of people seem to be still doing this testing, shielding, mask wearing etc. One person I spoke to said that she was buying LFT tests from Tesco at 10 for £18. We couldn't see a close relative at Christmas due to self isolation in a care home due to a positive covid test. But is any of this actually proportionate to the risk from the current 'wave' of the virus?
In the talk of the horror of “abandoning people to die” in the COVID context, it is worth remembering that we have abandoned people.
There are some immune compromised people who can’t take the vaccine and are at major risk from COVID.
I recall an account of one lady, who is living in the most remote Welsh cottage she can find.
For her, abandoning lockdowns was abandonment.
While I have much sympathy for the lady mentioned and others like her, realistically what else could we do and what did they do before covid? Plenty other nasty viruses out there that would be tough. Essentially covid19 has joined the roster of nasty bugs. For the vast majority of us it’s hardly an issue, but not all. Arguably appropriate antivirals might help?
My point was that society is ok abandoning people - so long as they are small in number are not especially cute.
There is, I understand, an ongoing issue with NICE, some new and very expensive drugs to boost he immune system, and such cases. Essentially - is having to live like a hermit a major life impact or not?
I understand your point but what can be done? Other than anti virals as suggested? We cannot eradicate covid. If the individual cannot b3 vaccinated then that’s tragic, but I don’t see many alternatives.
I think the point is rather to stop taking the piss out if them for still worrying about Covid.
Which is fair, although as I’ve said what did they do before covid?
covid changed things. for the people needing to shield most, beforehand they'd be able to spend most of the summer not worrying too much about flu/colds. Covid is spread year round.
there are a number of people (I know a couple) who are being more cautious than they possibly need but even with the vaccines, and assuming they can have them, they get less benefit from them for a shorter period.
The whole point of vaccines is to prevent the spread of diseases to protect those that can't have the vaccine.
Covid will likely become seasonal too.
almost certainly but it'll probably take a decade or more as it's a more novel virus. The combined flu/covid vaccine may help control it though
I read somewhere that two of the worst colds people get every year are the descendants of two flu pandemics (1918 and one from the 1870s)
I'm still calling the UK general election for 2 May.
Happy New Year to all on PB 👍🍺
Do we have a PB poster of the year?
I'm going for quality of post over quantity - darkage and Fishing for me.
Thanks for this Stocky, very flattering. I have particularly appreciated posts this year from @Dura_Ace for comic value; kle4 for written style; Leon on AI/Aliens.
Thanks to those who run the site, I've not posted that much this year but it is always good to know it is here - and that there is a remaining part of the internet where people can respectfully disagree with each other.
Without faux humility, whilst welcome I fear you do flatter me a little - if I were to take a stab at my most prominent writing characteristic I would probably plump for thoroughness over style.
You wrote some very good posts recently which articulated very complex things very concisely.
I was always being 'praised' for being 'thorough'. I then switched to writing short sentences. Cutting out anything superfluous. It is something I started practicing on PB but now do it at work. Writing emails a couple of lines long that convey the point immediately.
Change all the adjectives to "very". Remove all the "very"s.
'I was always being '' for being ''. I then switched to writing sentences. Cutting out anything . It is something I started practicing on PB but now do it at work. Writing emails a couple of lines that convey the point immediately.'
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
I’m not a rock guy, but it’s it basically that the fertile Thames and Severn Valleys promoted a Tory squirearchy, and the rocky uplands of everywhere else…did not? Look at the distribution of Church of England parishes, among other things.
Basically, the Severn-Wash line, give or take.
I haven’t quite worked out why Essex and Kent are so relatively Brexity, though. The Kentish Weald is not terribly fertile (was ironworks, not hops), but I don’t think that translates. Essex, former dairying country, should be more comfortable, should it not?
Eastern England was the cradle of the Cromwellians. It has always had this “stout yeoman” Roundhead rebel streak. And Essex is notoriously insurgent
Purer Anglo Saxon blood?
Hardly. Look at the West Country with its Independent religion.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
Ooh, that reminds me there’s still some nice wines left over from Christmas.
I hate New Year, so will be having an early night as usual. But the dog will be up, and he says….
An early night on new year's eve is one of life's great pleasures, perhaps a privilege of being less young; though I am glad to think of all the people really enjoying themselves. Part of my family will be in Edinburgh.
I like to listen to the Bach B minor mass on new year's eve, and have a read of the opening of D.L.Sayers detective masterpiece, the Nine Tailors, the action of which begins in a snowy, bleak Lincolnshire at 4.15pm on 31st December 1929. Bliss.
I hate New Year, so will be having an early night as usual. But the dog will be up, and he says….
An early night on new year's eve is one of life's great pleasures, perhaps a privilege of being less young; though I am glad to think of all the people really enjoying themselves. Part of my family will be in Edinburgh.
I like to listen to the Bach B minor mass on new year's eve, and have a read of the opening of D.L.Sayers detective masterpiece, the Nine Tailors, the action of which begins in a snowy, bleak Lincolnshire at 4.15pm on 31st December 1929. Bliss.
The last twenty years we have gone to my mother in laws for NY eve, and held a second Christmas. Sadly she died in September, so tonight is the first time we won’t be doing the usual for two decades. Strange times. A bit somber too, but hey the early night will be good!
Provided it doesn’t turn out to be the end of the world as we know it.
But right now, I feel fine.
On Topic, assuming Levido has read the Evil Overlord Rulebook, all we can conclude is that the election isn't planned to be on November 17. The more interesting question is why he wants to plant that date in the minds of Shipman's readership?
(In passing, "Shipman's readership" is surprisingly satisfying to say. I recommend it.)
As do I.
I’m sure our @Leon also feels fine, predicting one global catastrophe after another whilst assuming that his bank account and the walls of his Camden Town bedsit will keep him safe.
Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Gaza, the US election/civil war, and the fragility of both western democracy and the financial/debt position of western economies and many of their consumers, will make this coming year an exceptionally fragile one.
I expect that global stock markets are going to lead into the coming year with a good bull runs. But my advice would be to watch closely and always be thinking about the right time to sell.
We have had a remarkable Santa rally this year both in the US and the UK. This may be a good time to lock in some of that profit into bonds and gilts.
The NSI fixed rate offer of a couple of months ago was imo the deal of a lifetime for low risk investors. I hope all PBers lucky enough to have spare cash did some.
I locked into a 2027 gilt instead. Capturing 250bps tax free spread over my fixed mortgage. Not bad for uk government credit risk
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yea, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
I get the centre right economics but is the wine growing industry 'woke' ?
Well, its Hogmanay and with the New Year almost upon us here are my predictions for 2024.
1. There will be an election in November. The Tories and the SNP will lose. Labour will have a modest majority, greatly helped by 20+ seats in Scotland, all taken from the SNP. The loss of seats may well be the end of the road for Yousaf. By the end of the year Rishi will have stood down as an MP and be looking to go back to California.
2. The economy will do better than current forecasts, growing modestly. There will not be a technical recession but we may come close in the first half of the year.
3. By the Summer both Russia and Ukraine will be exhausted and some form of messy compromise satisfying no one will be found.
4. Biden will win the US election, more easily than he did in 2020. The Democrats will also gain the House but may struggle in the Senate. Biden will not complete his second term.
5. China will have another difficult year with huge debt overhangs in property undermining the tax base of several provinces finances. Growth will slow even further and Xi will compensate by making more bellicose noises over Taiwan but not act.
So, you all now know where not to put your bets. Good luck all!
1 - Agreed, although I suspect October. Sunak and Clegg will meet up on some SoCal beach.
2 - Agreed, although stock markets may not fare so well, looking forward to the next crisis
3 - possibly. Or we’ll be in the same position next New Year.
4 - if he’s up against Trump, for sure.
5 - the fragility of China’s economic situation is often overlooked. Sadly its possible implosion doesn’t bode well for the rest of us.
1. They both prefer NorCal. Poor judgement in my view.
Well, its Hogmanay and with the New Year almost upon us here are my predictions for 2024.
1. There will be an election in November. The Tories and the SNP will lose. Labour will have a modest majority, greatly helped by 20+ seats in Scotland, all taken from the SNP. The loss of seats may well be the end of the road for Yousaf. By the end of the year Rishi will have stood down as an MP and be looking to go back to California.
2. The economy will do better than current forecasts, growing modestly. There will not be a technical recession but we may come close in the first half of the year.
3. By the Summer both Russia and Ukraine will be exhausted and some form of messy compromise satisfying no one will be found.
4. Biden will win the US election, more easily than he did in 2020. The Democrats will also gain the House but may struggle in the Senate. Biden will not complete his second term.
5. China will have another difficult year with huge debt overhangs in property undermining the tax base of several provinces finances. Growth will slow even further and Xi will compensate by making more bellicose noises over Taiwan but not act.
So, you all now know where not to put your bets. Good luck all!
PB will be having a predictions thread in the next few days.
The winner of that contest will be winning a bottle of champagne.
What size? A pint?
The size of Leon's brain.
I am joking, it will be a large bottle, metric or Limperial depending on the winner's preference.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
I hate New Year, so will be having an early night as usual. But the dog will be up, and he says….
An early night on new year's eve is one of life's great pleasures, perhaps a privilege of being less young; though I am glad to think of all the people really enjoying themselves. Part of my family will be in Edinburgh.
I like to listen to the Bach B minor mass on new year's eve, and have a read of the opening of D.L.Sayers detective masterpiece, the Nine Tailors, the action of which begins in a snowy, bleak Lincolnshire at 4.15pm on 31st December 1929. Bliss.
Oddly enough - I quite often have nodded off to the R4 production of the Nine Tailors on NY eve, then polished off the remainder on NY day. Bit of a tradition now.
I hate New Year, so will be having an early night as usual. But the dog will be up, and he says….
An early night on new year's eve is one of life's great pleasures, perhaps a privilege of being less young; though I am glad to think of all the people really enjoying themselves. Part of my family will be in Edinburgh.
I like to listen to the Bach B minor mass on new year's eve, and have a read of the opening of D.L.Sayers detective masterpiece, the Nine Tailors, the action of which begins in a snowy, bleak Lincolnshire at 4.15pm on 31st December 1929. Bliss.
The dona nobis pacem is the most sublime conclusion to any work. It never fails to lift my spirits. Here is my favourite version (those baroque trumpets)!
Last year marked the bicentenary of the medical journal The Lancet, first published in October 1823. The Lancet was one of the world’s first medical journals, only outranked by the New England Journal Medicine (which dates from 1812). The first editor of The Lancet, the surgeon Thomas Wakley (later Sir Thomas Wakley) took it upon himself to expose frauds and quackery in medical practice.
Wakley subsequently became a member of parliament, and it was at his instigation that the Medical Act 1858 passed into law, laying the way to the creation of the General Medical Council (GMC). The purpose of the act, set out in the opening sentence of the legislation is to ensure that ‘Persons requiring Medical Aid should be enabled to distinguish qualified from unqualified Practitioners’.
The problem which the Medical Act of 1858 was intended to solve was not a new one. In 1518, King Henry VIII established the Royal College of Physicians, and in its founding charter gave the College the power to determine who could, and who could not, call themselves a physician.
In the last twenty years, successive governments, aware of the relentless increase in workload of the NHS, have promised more doctors. A number of new medical schools have been created, but no one seems to have addressed the unendurable pressure of work, the intolerable conditions of service, and declining remuneration. The inevitable result is that doctors retire early, emigrate, choose other careers, or move to the private sector. The number of doctors fails to increase.
Rather than attend to the obvious solution and take more care of the doctors, the government’s idea has been to flood the NHS with bogus doctors, dressed up with the title Physician Associate. They have no medical qualifications, but seem remarkably keen to ‘have a go’; whether patients appreciate that they are not qualified doctors is open to doubt. Already we are hearing of the inevitable consequences.
In December 2023, on a conveniently busy day for news, the government sneaked through parliament a change in the GMC’s duties, which placed upon them the duty of registering the Physician Associates. In turn, the GMC has asked the Royal College of Physicians to be responsible for the training of these new ‘gimcracks’. The story has received remarkably little coverage in the press.
The problems of medical manpower can be solved by giving us the resources to work efficiently; better IT and secretarial support would be a start, together with less managerial interference. The answer isn’t to appoint Potemkin doctors.
This is somewhat I’ll informed. The PA’s will have degrees and undertake postgraduate training in the role. I agree with the issues around doctor retention, but to attack PA’s is not right. I suppose you don’t think nurses should be able to prescribe drugs, or pharmacists, but suitably qualified nurses and pharmacist do this now, and all pharmacists who graduate from 2025 on will be able to prescribe. It’s well worth challenging ways of operating all the time. My favourite example is this. During my leukaemia treatment I had bloods taken on a regular basis. Phlebotomists do this all day every day and had no issues. A doctor who had taken my bone marrow sample proceeded to try 5 (yes five!) places to get some peripheral bloods. I know who I wanted to take the blood…
I agree. I work as part of an MDT with nurses and other paramedical professions. We jointly manage patients and have done for some years. These aren't PAs but are registered professionals with their own professional bodies.
The problem is not PA's but rather how they are regulated and supervised. I have worked with them in Africa, and it really is no big deal, similarly in America.
Where @franklyn is right is that using them interchangeably with doctors, and without clear demarcation as to roles and responsibilities is dangerous.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yea, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
I get the centre right economics but is the wine growing industry 'woke' ?
It depends how you define woke. The definition is getting so wide, thanks to right wing journalists, that simply wanting to be nice to foreigners counts as woke. The wine industry is very international.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
Ooh, that reminds me there’s still some nice wines left over from Christmas.
Perhaps it’s Dry February this year, cheers!
January only starts with 12th night. Until then it's acceptable to consume Christmas leftovers!
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
Bordeaux’s wine industry was founded by the nouveau riche. Very different from the hard working sons of the soil in Burgundy. Although sadly the cote de Beaune in particular is getting a bit nouv since prices went up into the stratosphere. A winemaker from Pouilly-Loche (not exactly cheap) was complaining to me that the growers of meursault are getting so *gesture of finger on nose* that they wouldn’t even do the traditional bottle for bottle swap among vignerons.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
Presumably the soil won't be great with all that builders rubble and the like?
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Macron has been good for France
Probably the most capable European leader of the last decade or so
In the end a lot smarter than Merkel and miles better than any Brit since Blair
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
Presumably the soil won't be great with all that builders rubble and the like?
Builders rubble is actually pretty good terroir.
There are large swathes of totally shit land planted with vines (and old ones at that) that only survive economically because of the village name.
Far better to get a decent wine from a good Châlonnais village like Mercurey or Givry, where only the quality land is bevined.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Macron has been good for France
Probably the most capable European leader of the last decade or so
In the end a lot smarter than Merkel and miles better than any Brit since Blair
Is France notably better off? I would not judge him overly successful in international affairs, although any French President is kind of up against it.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Macron has been good for France
Probably the most capable European leader of the last decade or so
In the end a lot smarter than Merkel and miles better than any Brit since Blair
Yebbut for a French president he's surely an internationalist
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Bordeaux is also flat or gently sloping. The other geographical distinction you can make in France is flat = Le Pen, steep = others.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Bordeaux is also flat or gently sloping. The other geographical distinction you can make in France is flat = Le Pen, steep = others.
I see that
eta - just as Essex is flat and the Cotswolds hilly (re Brex*)
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
In France, the right soil type (ironically, usually poorer soil for general agriculture) can make a number of the locals into millionaires from wine.
I drove from Beaune to our house this afternoon, via Pommard, Meursault and Puligny Montrachet. The area is ridiculous. Land so valuable you could buy a house, knock it down and sell for more money by planting vines.
Presumably the soil won't be great with all that builders rubble and the like?
Builders rubble is actually pretty good terroir.
There are large swathes of totally shit land planted with vines (and old ones at that) that only survive economically because of the village name.
Far better to get a decent wine from a good Châlonnais village like Mercurey or Givry, where only the quality land is bevined.
My secret vice is a particular Le Gros Plante du Pays Nantais which I gather is considered terrible stuff and rarely exported. But I suspect it supports various non-entity exurbs of Nantes.
The main change for me in 2023 was moving to a situation where my family have two homes, a flat in the south east of the UK and an old wooden house in Finland. We have been travelling between the two. The total cost of all travel, including working one day a week in the office in London and flying to and from Finland is less than an annual season ticket to travel in to London every day from our house in England cost me in 2014. The schooling and quality of life and overall social system is far better in Finland but the weather and landscape is in my view preferable in England despite Finland being beautiful in its own way. The total cost of the two homes combined was less than a family house in England and the running costs are manageable but I shouldn't pretend that it wasn't all basically made possible by inheritance. The main purpose of living like this was to put my son in to the Finnish school system which has worked out well but obviously it comes with other challenges.
Whilst I have been negative about Covid and mass immigration a lot the main positive of these two factors was a shift to remote working that made all this possible, I've got colleagues online in Egypt and Nicaragua. It is minus 15 here in Finland and I have been out shovelling snow. About to go to buy some beers before the 9pm licensing cut off.
How v interesting. Can we ask how you managed the visa situation?
My wife and I have decided to do another 12-18 months in New York. The kids are happy here - happier than they were in London but admittedly it was a Covid-blighted London.
I miss the UK and while I fiercely love certain things about the US, there are other things I don’t think I could ever totally reconcile myself to.
It‘a hard being an immigrant. This is my third country of residence. Where, really, is home?
Quite complex and with some possibly unresolved grey areas... but in summary we are dual EU nationals so the issues fall away. It is a bit different for us because my wife is Finnish and very rooted here. I did work out that I could never completely 'leave' England for various reasons largely to do with family and work so we came up with this solution. I've learned to be ok with travelling around and being on the move whereas my wife and son prefer to spend longer periods in each place. My son now has two sets of friends, one in England and one in Finland, two lots of birthday parties to attend etc so a lot of forward planning needed. In Finland they are not that worried about him missing school the way they were in England. Most of the year the flights on Ryanair are about £30 each way.
Sounds like a nice arrangement, I envy you your EU passports. 🇪🇺
Yeah, I realise it is an enviable arrangement and don't take it for granted. Sorting it out took many years and cost thousands of pounds though - just to continue the rights we had in early 2016.
Out of interest do you speak Finnish? It's supposedly a hard language to learn.
France is still seriously imperilled by its demography and migration patterns, however
There were two presidential opinion polls last year which gave figures for the second round, and both had Le Pen winning by around 55/45. (It was curious that there were only two of them all year).
Well, its Hogmanay and with the New Year almost upon us here are my predictions for 2024.
1. There will be an election in November. The Tories and the SNP will lose. Labour will have a modest majority, greatly helped by 20+ seats in Scotland, all taken from the SNP. The loss of seats may well be the end of the road for Yousaf. By the end of the year Rishi will have stood down as an MP and be looking to go back to California.
2. The economy will do better than current forecasts, growing modestly. There will not be a technical recession but we may come close in the first half of the year.
3. By the Summer both Russia and Ukraine will be exhausted and some form of messy compromise satisfying no one will be found.
4. Biden will win the US election, more easily than he did in 2020. The Democrats will also gain the House but may struggle in the Senate. Biden will not complete his second term.
5. China will have another difficult year with huge debt overhangs in property undermining the tax base of several provinces finances. Growth will slow even further and Xi will compensate by making more bellicose noises over Taiwan but not act.
So, you all now know where not to put your bets. Good luck all!
1 - Agreed, although I suspect October. Sunak and Clegg will meet up on some SoCal beach.
2 - Agreed, although stock markets may not fare so well, looking forward to the next crisis
3 - possibly. Or we’ll be in the same position next New Year.
4 - if he’s up against Trump, for sure.
5 - the fragility of China’s economic situation is often overlooked. Sadly its possible implosion doesn’t bode well for the rest of us.
1. They both prefer NorCal. Poor judgement in my view.
Technically, San Francisco is in Southern California.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Well, I would suggest a variation on this. The electoral geography of France definitely follows geology. But it’s more complicated than limestone left granite right.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
I think in England it may be simpler
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Rich rural people in Britain are still largely Tory and Lib Dem. Poor people are mainly Labour with some Boris Tories and kippers. So yes, that probably makes a difference.
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
And yet in the last French election I was amazed at how some of the richest, most venerated wine areas of Bordeaux voted solidly Le Pen
What’s that about?!
The Somewheres versus Anywheres distinction might be relevant. LePen is a Somewhere, Macron an Anywhere for example.
Macron has been good for France
Probably the most capable European leader of the last decade or so
In the end a lot smarter than Merkel and miles better than any Brit since Blair
Is France notably better off? I would not judge him overly successful in international affairs, although any French President is kind of up against it.
I was factoring in the dark French situation. A very proud nation in permanent secular cultural decline - see the Sahel, and the ever diminishing “francophonie” - plus some really negative migration patterns
Macron has had to work with that. And I think he’s done really quite well. Restoring some French prestige. Exploiting Brexit cleverly to advance Paris over London and French interests in the EU
He’s a super smart pragmatist. I imagine le pen will win next time
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
I presume the out of date stereotypes related to the portrayal of the Welsh in Zulu. Surely they were not *all* choristers.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My dad’s favourite film. Zulu
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
I presume the out of date stereotypes related to the portrayal of the Welsh in Zulu. Surely they were not *all* choristers.
No, we still all walk the valleys and the coast close harmony singing.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
Two of the finest films of all time. Makes me wish I had a telly. Almost.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My dad’s favourite film. Zulu
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
Zulu actually holds up pretty well, even by today's standards.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Have you seen "Carry on up the Khyber"?
I have not seen any Carry On film since the early 90s. I’m not overly keen to exhume them, to be honest.
The Khyber is genius.
They are great period pieces if viewed in the right spirit.
More seriously, I would recommend "the four feathers" 1939 version, though the 2002 was good too. Also "the life and death of Colonel Blimp"
I have not seen the Four Feathers.
Colonel Blimp I saw some time ago and didn’t really “get”. Also not much fussed by A Matter of Life and Death. But (like Scorsese), the Red Shoes is one of my favourite films.
As for comedy period pieces, I’m Alright Jack (1959) has aged pretty well.
I'm still calling the UK general election for 2 May.
Happy New Year to all on PB 👍🍺
Do we have a PB poster of the year?
I'm going for quality of post over quantity - darkage and Fishing for me.
Thanks for this Stocky, very flattering. I have particularly appreciated posts this year from @Dura_Ace for comic value; kle4 for written style; Leon on AI/Aliens.
Thanks to those who run the site, I've not posted that much this year but it is always good to know it is here - and that there is a remaining part of the internet where people can respectfully disagree with each other.
Without faux humility, whilst welcome I fear you do flatter me a little - if I were to take a stab at my most prominent writing characteristic I would probably plump for thoroughness over style.
You wrote some very good posts recently which articulated very complex things very concisely.
I was always being 'praised' for being 'thorough'. I then switched to writing short sentences. Cutting out anything superfluous. It is something I started practicing on PB but now do it at work. Writing emails a couple of lines long that convey the point immediately.
Change all the adjectives to "very". Remove all the "very"s.
'I was always being '' for being ''. I then switched to writing sentences. Cutting out anything . It is something I started practicing on PB but now do it at work. Writing emails a couple of lines that convey the point immediately.'
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Have you seen "Carry on up the Khyber"?
I have not seen any Carry On film since the early 90s. I’m not overly keen to exhume them, to be honest.
The Khyber is genius.
They are great period pieces if viewed in the right spirit.
More seriously, I would recommend "the four feathers" 1939 version, though the 2002 was good too. Also "the life and death of Colonel Blimp"
I have not seen the Four Feathers.
Colonel Blimp I saw some time ago and didn’t really “get”. Also not much fussed by A Matter of Life and Death. But (like Scorsese), the Red Shoes is one of my favourite films.
As for comedy period pieces, I’m Alright Jack (1959) has aged pretty well.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My dad’s favourite film. Zulu
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
Zulu actually holds up pretty well, even by today's standards.
Michael Caine's first big role. For a politics angle, Mangosutho Buthulezi, long time Zulu PM, plays his own great-grandfather.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My dad’s favourite film. Zulu
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
Zulu actually holds up pretty well, even by today's standards.
Michael Caine's first big role. For a politics angle, Mangosutho Buthulezi, long time Zulu PM, plays his own great-grandfather.
Credits actually say, “Introducing Michael Caine”.
My prediction for the Tory share at the next general election is that they'll get something very similar to the 31.4% that John Major polled in 1997, and the LDs will get about 14%. But I'm not confident about making forecasts for the other parties.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Ch 4 have been doing a series of classic British films. Yesterday I watched Laurence of Arabia and today Zulu. I was intrigued by the preliminary commentary that the films displayed out of date stereotypes and language. In the case of Zulu it also warned against nudity. In Zulu? But of course all the Zulus, both men and women, had nothing on above the waist.
My dad’s favourite film. Zulu
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
Zulu actually holds up pretty well, even by today's standards.
Michael Caine's first big role. For a politics angle, Mangosutho Buthulezi, long time Zulu PM, plays his own great-grandfather.
I have rigged up a projector at home and am working through various unseen (by me) classics.
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Have you seen "Carry on up the Khyber"?
I have not seen any Carry On film since the early 90s. I’m not overly keen to exhume them, to be honest.
The Khyber is genius.
They are great period pieces if viewed in the right spirit.
More seriously, I would recommend "the four feathers" 1939 version, though the 2002 was good too. Also "the life and death of Colonel Blimp"
Hitler’s favourite movie was a proto-Zulu pro-British empire epic called “The Lives of a Bengal Lancer”
True story
Howard Hughes's favorite film was "Ice Station Zebra".
"Ice Station Zebra" has the same plot as "A Devil Wears Prada". An ingenue is given a mission that they dislike, is told off in an epic speech by a non-British actor playing a supercilious man with a British accent, is betrayed by a comrade but still wins the day, leaving with what they came to get.
Comments
Sadly not my view tonight, it’s a little too misty for me to see from home nine miles away. 20 minutes to go!
"Right-wing granite, left-wing limestone" André Siegfried's famously claimed in 1913.
The father of electoral geography argued that the soil had a lasting political impact, one that still pops its head in modern French politics.
A few tweets on conservatism and soils.”
https://x.com/valen10francois/status/1569699300468301826?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
My immediate thought is: Cornwall, granite, mildly left; Glos, limestone, definitely right
Indeed the whole limestone belt across England is Tory
Everything I have said on this subject is entirely valid, the Bank bung is public spending drawn from the same pot as hospitals, HS2 and cuts in tax.
Furthermore, apeals to your own expertise have no bearing on the discussion except to invalidate your own arguments.
Wakley subsequently became a member of parliament, and it was at his instigation that the Medical Act 1858 passed into law, laying the way to the creation of the General Medical Council (GMC). The purpose of the act, set out in the opening sentence of the legislation is to ensure that ‘Persons requiring Medical Aid should be enabled to distinguish qualified from unqualified Practitioners’.
The problem which the Medical Act of 1858 was intended to solve was not a new one. In 1518, King Henry VIII established the Royal College of Physicians, and in its founding charter gave the College the power to determine who could, and who could not, call themselves a physician.
In the last twenty years, successive governments, aware of the relentless increase in workload of the NHS, have promised more doctors. A number of new medical schools have been created, but no one seems to have addressed the unendurable pressure of work, the intolerable conditions of service, and declining remuneration. The inevitable result is that doctors retire early, emigrate, choose other careers, or move to the private sector. The number of doctors fails to increase.
Rather than attend to the obvious solution and take more care of the doctors, the government’s idea has been to flood the NHS with bogus doctors, dressed up with the title Physician Associate. They have no medical qualifications, but seem remarkably keen to ‘have a go’; whether patients appreciate that they are not qualified doctors is open to doubt. Already we are hearing of the inevitable consequences.
In December 2023, on a conveniently busy day for news, the government sneaked through parliament a change in the GMC’s duties, which placed upon them the duty of registering the Physician Associates. In turn, the GMC has asked the Royal College of Physicians to be responsible for the training of these new ‘gimcracks’. The story has received remarkably little coverage in the press.
The problems of medical manpower can be solved by giving us the resources to work efficiently; better IT and secretarial support would be a start, together with less managerial interference. The answer isn’t to appoint Potemkin doctors.
Limestone ridges tend to have poorish but well drained soil suitable for viticulture. In the presidentials they do well with Macron. Our commune in Saône et Loire voted something mad like 80% Macron. Granite is not very productive but suits cattle rearing. Just as in Britain, cattle country is conservative with a small c. In the presidential it scored well with les Républicains.
But Le Pen does well in lowland and coal bearing geology. Not granite. So do the far left. Industrial geology.
Look at the electoral map for Saône et Loire overlay geology. Macron on limestone, Républicains on granite (but not Beaujolais, which is Macron because its vines and orchards), Le Pen in Bresse.
Translate to Britain. Le Pen’s Anglo cousins in the coal-bearing uplands and alluvial lowlands of the East. Traditional Tories and orange bookers in the granite and metamorphic West Country. Lib Dems of of the post-2016 sort in the limestone regions of the downs, Surrey Hills and Wessex.
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
Limestone areas tend to have more attractive towns and villages - because of the plentiful golden stone. That makes for more expensive houses and richer citizens = Tories
Very obvious topographical and geological correlation.
there are a number of people (I know a couple) who are being more cautious than they possibly need but even with the vaccines, and assuming they can have them, they get less benefit from them for a shorter period.
The whole point of vaccines is to prevent the spread of diseases to protect those that can't have the vaccine.
I’d probably just carry on taking my chances, FWIW, but I can equally see that some would choose otherwise.
It’s well worth challenging ways of operating all the time.
My favourite example is this. During my leukaemia treatment I had bloods taken on a regular basis. Phlebotomists do this all day every day and had no issues. A doctor who had taken my bone marrow sample proceeded to try 5 (yes five!) places to get some peripheral bloods. I know who I wanted to take the blood…
Basically, the Severn-Wash line, give or take.
I haven’t quite worked out why Essex and Kent are so relatively Brexity, though. The Kentish Weald is not terribly fertile (was ironworks, not hops), but I don’t think that translates. Essex, former dairying country, should be more comfortable, should it not?
Literally existential for them.
Half-thinking of whether I should quit my job.
Might keep it on ice and see how the year goes.
Purer Anglo Saxon blood?
France also has viticulture as a cultural phenomenon. That’s still a minority thing in Britain. Viti areas in most of the continent are economically centre-right, culturally centre-left. Woke capitalists. Macronists. Free democrats and CDUers. Ciudadanes. Lib Dems.
Watch as areas of Southern England become meaningfully viticultural. Sussex Weald, Kent downs, Hants downs, Surrey Hills, Crouch valley of Essex. Watch them go inexorably yellow.
I read somewhere that two of the worst colds people get every year are the descendants of two flu pandemics (1918 and one from the 1870s)
Perhaps it’s Dry February this year, cheers!
I like to listen to the Bach B minor mass on new year's eve, and have a read of the opening of D.L.Sayers detective masterpiece, the Nine Tailors, the action of which begins in a snowy, bleak Lincolnshire at 4.15pm on 31st December 1929. Bliss.
What’s that about?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffrsc3wdBt4&pp=ygUYYmFjaCBiIG1pbm9yIG1hc3Mgc3V6dWtp
The problem is not PA's but rather how they are regulated and supervised. I have worked with them in Africa, and it really is no big deal, similarly in America.
Where @franklyn is right is that using them interchangeably with doctors, and without clear demarcation as to roles and responsibilities is dangerous.
Trump 2.48 / 2.5
Biden 3.45 / 3.5
Haley 9.8 / 10
Newsom 14.5 / 15.5
Kenendy 30 / 32
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/politics/usa-presidential-election-2024/election-winner-betting-1.176878927
Wtf. What was the point of the British Empire???
Ooooooh
Kamala Harris could be the next President but might not win that market if she becomes POTUS via the XXVth.
Edit - XXVth? What have I just done there to so many languages?
So far, Mean Streets (1973) and To Be Or Not To Be (1942). Both deserved classics.
Zulu (1964) was much better than I thought it would be. I wonder if readers can recommend other “British Westerns”.
Probably the most capable European leader of the last decade or so
In the end a lot smarter than Merkel and miles better than any Brit since Blair
There are large swathes of totally shit land planted with vines (and old ones at that) that only survive economically because of the village name.
Far better to get a decent wine from a good Châlonnais village like Mercurey or Givry, where only the quality land is bevined.
I would not judge him overly successful in international affairs, although any French President is kind of up against it.
eta - just as Essex is flat and the Cotswolds hilly (re Brex*)
I’m not overly keen to exhume them, to be honest.
Macron has had to work with that. And I think he’s done really quite well. Restoring some French prestige. Exploiting Brexit cleverly to advance Paris over London and French interests in the EU
He’s a super smart pragmatist. I imagine le pen will win next time
They are great period pieces if viewed in the right spirit.
More seriously, I would recommend "the four feathers" 1939 version, though the 2002 was good too. Also "the life and death of Colonel Blimp"
He used to take us kids to see it about every 6 months. We’d probably be taken into care now
True story
Makes me wish I had a telly.
Almost.
Colonel Blimp I saw some time ago and didn’t really “get”. Also not much fussed by A Matter of Life and Death. But (like Scorsese), the Red Shoes is one of my favourite films.
As for comedy period pieces, I’m Alright Jack (1959) has aged pretty well.
https://twitter.com/GavinBarwell/status/1741505388321644695
Being blunt a 1997 result for the Tories looks like a great result for them and way better than I think they are going to get.
A fine film.
Someone needs to write the British “Radetsky March”.
For a politics angle, Mangosutho Buthulezi, long time Zulu PM, plays his own great-grandfather.
You can see the signs of decline. Ominous signals. And yet the power of the Empire remains immense. And glorious villas are still built by the wealthy
"Ice Station Zebra" has the same plot as "A Devil Wears Prada". An ingenue is given a mission that they dislike, is told off in an epic speech by a non-British actor playing a supercilious man with a British accent, is betrayed by a comrade but still wins the day, leaving with what they came to get.