Blah Blah

Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Christ almighty > > ?Tory bastards? was the phrase made famous by Major > > Not history repeating itself. I think that is the perfect example Sephiroth, of someone so intent on demonishing a perceived other side, that they lose sight of the ignorance displayed in their own bias ;)

Worth remembering Malumbu that a huge part of the human genome project was done in Cambridge and we really are at the forefront globally of that type of genetic science, attracting the best scientists from all over the world. This is why those who make denial claims, that covid is a hoax, or that it was created in a lab etc, don't understand how advanced we really are in that area of science in the UK.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The AstraZeneca vaccine can be produced locally in > countries like Thailand and India - a big > advantage. India has a huge production plan. I'm > not sure where ours are sourced from. > > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-555206 > 58 Except India are now holding back vaccine for their own population. The result is that the first 15 million AstraZenica doses are being delivered to the UK, with no more coming until March end at the earliest. Even on the one dose policy with second doses being given from later deliveries, that limits the vaccine program and falls short of being able to complete vaccination of the 30 million that fall into the phase one identified groups before Easter. This is why a six month rollout was always a more reasonable timeframe, over the eternal false promises given by this government that everything can happen quicker.

Sorry, but I reject that, because procurement isn't the determining factor for availability. And if you want to be detailed about it, the UK only ordered one initial order from Pfizer, over other countries that put in repeat orders to begin with. Any repeat order for us will now be at the back of a long queue. And you know better than to defend the ludicrous claims of Trinny. You are better than that.

I like Louisa's slow puncture analogy :)

Well Said DR. The development of vaccines is an example of where collaboration and regulatory alignment works. Lives are saved because of it. So in fact, we should be thanking TrinnyTroll for highlighting that success of collaboration, and asking if it will be so straightforward now that we can no longer take advantage of Erasmus based exchange programs run by various prestigious R&D Universities across the EU. But I digress..... On the vaccine supply, every government wants to claim they are on top of any rollout. That is natural. But when governments change the science to suit their own logistical problems (suggesting that people can have two different vaccines when there is NO medical trails to check if that is even effective, let alone safe), that is something we should all worry about. Something clearly has gone wrong with the second shipment of the Pfizer vaccine, otherwise 2nd jab appointments wouldn't be being cancelled. Now either that is a supply issue, or it is some holdup in batch verification (all batches that arrive have to be checked), or it is government worrying about the longer time frame for the delivery of that specific order (it is not delivered all at once remember), or any other vaccine deliveries. Bear in mind that the UK have to vaccinate almost 30 million people twice, just to to cover all vulnerable age groups, front line workers and those with underlying conditions. Even at 1 million shots a week, that is going to be six months. Countries with smaller populations are going to get there faster. Countries with larger populations slower. Government logic has now become to reduce the death rates over reducing infection rates, so that restrictions can be eased. But this is a tricky route to take, because for all those who die, other multiples need ICU treatment to recover. And when restrictions ease, infection rates rise. There is also the issue with just people getting ill in general, and being unwell for weeks, fatigued for even longer in some cases. People of work ill also hit the economy if those figures are high enough. This is a difficult balance to strike on many levels, not just the issue of mortality.

Supply is already an issue for the UK with many who were given the first Pfizer shot having appointments for the second shot cancelled because there is no vaccine to give them. Pfizer have already said there is no evidence of lasting efficacy after 21 days and that their trials did not look at anything but a two shot program. For the UK government to be claiming that does not matter is just plain wrong. The Oxford vaccine can however be given within a 12 week window for both shots. And let's stop the silly games eh TrinnyTroll? Supply is going to be an issue for all of Europe and the USA, in spite of the best efforts of manufacturers. That is just the reality of the challenge in vaccinating the entire world. Meanwhile, we might want to ask why some countries have managed infection rather better than us, and see what can be learned there.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is rather ominous > > ?Populists depend on enemies, real or imagined, to legitimise their actions and deflect from their > own shortcomings,? she said. If the EU has been the ?enemy abroad? since 2016, it will steadily be > replaced by ?enemies within?: MPs, civil servants, judges, lawyers, experts, the BBC. > > ?Individuals and institutions who dare to limit the power of the executive, even if it is just by > asking questions, are at constant risk of being denounced as ?activists?? by the Johnson > government, Von Bismarck said. This is a really important point. A bill is already being drawn up to limit the remit of the Supreme Court, especially when it comes to actions taken by the government. That is going to be an undermining of Parliamentary sovereignty in itself. A deliberate move to consolidate the power of the executive in a way that can not be challenged, even by the law. Getting Brexit done was only the first step on a road that is being shaped by the more extreme fringes of the Tory Party, and they are more UKIP than conservative.

And now the troll proves my point perfectly ;)

The general conversation about the direction the UK takes is the key point now. There are lots of good reasons for not wanting to be the USA or Singapore, especially if you are a low paid worker. The Tory party have to be careful here. They won the election in part by promising better living standards to whole regions of disenfranchised people, regions which had benefited from EU investment. I just do not trust, nor see how the Tories are going to deliver on that promise. Even New Labour failed to address that disenfranchisement in meaningful ways. So that will be the litmus test I think.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are you aspiring to be the lead member of a > self-appointed forum mafia intent on suppressing > views that don't align with yours? Oh do grow up. It is quite clear I am now your no.1 target for whiny trolling. Pathetic.

Yeslovewhatcanigetu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Brexit is about emotion, not any rational or > objective thought process. For most people life > will go on pretty much as it was before, with > slightly more bureaucracy when they go on their > summer holidays. Meanwhile, as we realise that > we?ve cut ourselves off from the world more than > is good for us, we?ll drift closer back towards > Europe. We?re European, they?re our closest > neighbours - this is just the beginning of the > next chapter and nowhere near the end of the > story. Exactly this. Brexit is indeed a notion. The practical realities of economic health are what will determine any future re-entry, or push for re-entry. Right now is too early to tell and on that leave voters are right. We are in a de facto transition while business and the economy adjusts. How long that transition takes is unknown. The question for me is, as it has always been, how patient will a public be in waiting for promised sunlit uplands, and that leveling up? They are not going to wait decades for it, that is for sure, and it will be the younger generations that decide the future. They are overwhelmingly pro EU. So not a question of if, but when we return, as I see it.

Quite. Starmer's opinion is irrelevant. Hayes has gone to some length to explain her decision, which appears to chime with the range of responses she got from her constituents. She is allowed to defy any whip if she so chooses. No-one knows at this point if the deal is going to be enough to avoid stark detriment to the UK economy, and Labour voted for the deal with expressed reservations and not because they like it, but because the other outcome of no deal would be far worse.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @BB. It may help your credibility if you resisted > such dismissive and insulting responses to DF's > post. Such a response is obviously designed to > deter formites from making inputs that conflict > with your views. I can go into great detail as to why DF's post was nonsense, but felt it was blatantly obvious and needed no further explanation. The question around sovereignty has been done to death and the leavers have never won that argument sadly.

What absolute nonsense DF. It wasn't the EU that wrote manifesto after manifesto, nor Queen's Speech after Queen's Speech.

Clutterqueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The country voted overwhelming to leave the EU back in 2016.... Can't even be honest about that can you? It was the narrowest of wins.

It is not compatible for a cabinet minister to defy the whip usually.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What a nice way to close out a sh-tty year....with Blah Blah and myself in agreement on something:) > > There is indeed hope for us all!! I did fall about laughing at this, but yes, it is true HA HA.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > that's fair comment. Agreed. It is the kind of 'in between' deal that was only ever going to be acceptable (even if through gritted teeth for some) to both sides. Watching the Parliamentary debate this afternoon, highlighted the details still yet to be ironed out. I would argue that, given the tabled review in four years time, that this is the beginning, rather than the end, of shaping our future trade deal with the EU. I still also think that the timing of the review will make this a big issue at the next EU, as the Tories seek to keep the UKIP swinging voters on side and those red wall voters too of course. Having said that, between now and then, the pandemic will end, and austerity mark 2 will hit. So who knows where the public mood will be in four years time. Will we even still be a UK in fact?

They also have the option of the review in four years time. In the statement they released, they focused on whether or not the deal satisfied their notion of 'sovereignty' and decided that it did.

To be fair TheCat, I made that point in my initial response to NeoR, so your reply is making what point exactly? There are correlations between socioeconomic outcomes and crime, repeated the world over. Yes it is a rather complex thing, but nonetheless, it is a better indicator of something, than the nonsense that NeoR is trying to push around ethnicity and size of minority populations. Isn't that what counter argument is supposed to do? Unpick or debunk the claim being made by a more reasonable or accurate example of that type of claim. There is plenty of real world data to draw upon, that absolutely destroys NeoR's assertions.

Neoralp, just stop it. You are fooling no-one. You are guided by nothing but your simple minded racism. So I went a fact-checked your premise of correlation between rates of African American population, and crime rates, and guess what, it isn't true! Alaska has the highest crime rate in America, and yet only ranks at 34 in terms of percentage of population that are African American. New Mexico is second in terms of crime rate and ranks at 40th for African American population. Tennessee, Arkansas and Nevada come in next. Let's see how they do for African Americans! 11, 13 and 26. So stop writing nonsense. Edited to add, that when comparing unemployment rates to crime levels however, there absolutely is a correlation between unemployment level and where that state ranks in crime statistics. The bottom 10 states in terms of crime rate, also sit in the bottom third of unemployment rates. The top ten states for crime, all sit in the top half of the unemployment rate charts. And the difference in percentages? Higher crime areas have between two and three times the levels of unemployment of those low crime rate states. Nevada has a whopping four times the level of unemployment of Idaho for example. That is how you analyse statistics.

I don't see a GE next year either. Even if the Tories change leader, why would they feel the need for a GE with that healthy majority?

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why is it that virtually all your posts start off > being judgemental in the first sentence? > > The negative verdicts you hand out are caustic, > insulting and designed to stifle any view you > disagree with. Your positive verdicts appear only > to serve an apparent need to reinforce your ego. > > Why not give it a rest and look on the bright > side? Most folks don't appreciate a sneering > know-all. Actually they don't. But when you post deliberate lies and then double down with the kind of nonsense you write here, the ego is clearly all yours. So what Sephiroth said.

Maybe try and answer your own question TheCat? Because that I think ties in with the inability of many leavers to cite the tangible gains of Brexit. We are heading for a difficult period economically speaking and at a time when division is stark and is still being fanned by opportunists and populists. Until the sneering stops, and there is a genuine effort by any government to level up, very little will change for the better. Even the EU deal, which at first sight brought relief and seemed like the cliff edge had been avoided, is up for review in just four years time. This offers no certainty to business and will suppress and stall the very investment that is going to be needed to get the economy out of austerity mark 2. Even on immigration, which was a major issue for many who voted leave,Brexit isn't going stop illegal migrants crossing the channel in dinghies. Only now, we are no longer part of the Dublin Agreement and will no longer be able to send those who already applied for asylum in another EU country, back to that country. At the end of the day, the woes that many people genuinely feel , the disenfranchisement, lack of upward social mobility etc etc, were never things caused by membership of the EU. In taking back control, we have simply given more power to the very people who decide the policies that lead to all those genuine woes that people feel. Hard to be optimistic about any of that.