Blah Blah

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.

Oh do behave Trinnydad. Stop with the silly games. I have given you the facts. Only one of those vaccines has been approved in the UK. Only the first delivery of the initial order has arrived so far. You wrote 'They are watching on in envy as the UK conducts several million vaccinations a week'. That is BS. Every major economy has pre-ordered huge numbers of vaccines in the hope any of them reach approval, and it takes some time to deliver huge orders as well (over a period of months). So just stop it.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pritti Patel apparently has asked a civil service > team to investigate bring in death penalty. Even if this is true, she would never get it through Parliament or the Lords.

That tries to argue that division has everything to do with ethnic origin and not socioeconomic outcomes, or a whole range of other determining factors, the legacy of history, slavery and so on. Of course there are more palatable forms of expression, protest, and pursuit of justice, but when things are slow to change, or never change (seemingly), an outpouring of frustration and anger followed by a militancy is usually what happens. We are now in an era where a Police Officer can suffocate a detainee on youtube live, and instead of addressing that, some people seek instead to act as though black people have nothing to complain about anymore. Belittle those who do as marxists, supremacists, militants, when they just want police officers to stop racially profiling them. No-one is even talking about that anymore it seems.

Some facts for Trinnydad The UK took delivery of 800,000 doses of the Pfizer vaccine at the beginning of December, enough to vaccinate 400k people, from a pre-order of 40 million doses (enough to ultimately vaccinate a third of the adult population). Between Dec 8th and 15th, 137,897 people were given their first vaccination. By Christmas Eve, a further 420,000 had been given the first vaccination. So that is 600k so far, not millions. The hope is to achieve 1 million per week by mid January. The refrigeration requirements of the Pfizer vaccine make it limited in its practical reach. When the Oxford vaccine is approved, that should enable the vaccination program to ramp up more quickly.

LOL EDguy.

Yep and he/ she also fails to see that the UK hasn't ordered enough doses either. That initial Pfizer order is one order only, that will take up to 10 months to deliver. The UK hopes are and always were, pinned on the Oxford vaccine. As for rollouts, it doesn't matter when you start(when you are talking of just months in difference), but how quickly you can get the vaccine out. The UK government aim is to reach 1 million doses a week. Even once that is achieved, you are looking at six months to vaccinate everyone over fifty and front line workers and vulnerable others. Other countries will catch up and may surpass that pretty quickly, and then there is the question of how we help those countries that lack the resources to vaccinate fast. Jingoistic bashing around something as important as this to score cheap points is distasteful. Beating this virus is a global concern that requires co-operation and it is going to be a hard winter for everyone.

I think it is important to bear in mind that the deal is by no means a full and comprehensive one (services are not included for example) and that negotiations will likely continue for years to arrive at that type of deal. Fishing seems to be s can that has been kicked down the road, just far enough to not possibly be Johnson's issue to fix. We no doubt will be bombarded with details and viewpoints over the coming days as MPs and others read the details. The spin can not be true on both sides, although perceptions matter in this. The good part is that a cliff edge is avoided, and the avoidance of tariffs really is important for the the British businesses and jobs that depend on those exports. That for me was always the first and foremost need of this agreement, to avoid those considerable costs. And that works too for us as consumers. The administration of new paperwork and borders procedures remains an additional burden, but is something that should settle down one once everyone is clear about what they need to do. The provision of adequate border staff and other resources to efficiently manage that, is down to government, and they need to pay attention to that. The question will be over the coming days, one of whether leave voters feel sufficiently divorced from the Single Market, and whether remain voters feel sufficiently reassured. Instinct tells me that one or the other, or both, are not going to be as happy as Boris was when he announced the deal is done. Everything promised was never deliverable, but has Boris delivered enough of it while conceding enough on other things, to find that middle ground consensus that renders the hardcore fringes irrelevant? That is what we shall see soon enough.

Europe will have its vaccine rollout well under way in the next couple of months. Not sure what your point really is here, when the UK only made that one initial order with Pfizer and that arrives in batches that could take 10 months to complete delivery of. This government, and no doubt many others, are pinning hopes on the Oxford/ Astrazeneca vaccine that requires no special refrigeration and can be distributed to GPs and much wider types of outlets as a result. It is much cheaper too. Irregardless of when vaccine rollouts start, we are talking differences of months and it will take at least a year to get even half a population vaccinated. There is no fast track on this for anyone.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If Boris gave way on fishing I'd say that was > pragmatic Apparently that is what has happened. Only rumours right now, but it seems the EU are leaking, hence Reuters breaking that the EU commission are meeting tm. Leaking I guess to prevent any row back from the UK side, when Boris takes it to his cabinet, if he hasn't already. So something is agreed for sure. Whether the EU 27 and the UK government like it remains to be seen. Boris can probably rely on Labour support if he has a backbench rebellion, to get it through. All going to be messy for him politically though.

The problem with the fast track testing the government announced is that they are asking lorry drivers to give up their place in the queue, to drive somewhere else, to get the test, and then rejoin the queue. As usual, government trying to centralise over localising something. Surely the answer is to mobile test drivers, starting from the front of the queue? Isn't that what the army are good at? Field services. Sky reporting that drivers are staying put, not going anywhere to be tested. So this isn't going to resolve itself quickly.

It isn't just Macron who has reacted to the new variant in the UK, but more than half a dozen other countries too, with travelers from the UK also banned for now. Macron can not be accused of playing games here (Brexit level) given the effort to find a workable and safe way to get the lorries moving again asap. All of these countries have their own ongoing challenges with the pandemic and are acting in the best interests of their own public health structures. I think we have to be careful to not conflate the real challenges of the pandemic, with the real challenges of Brexit. Brexit is its own beast with everything negotiable. There is no negotiating with a virus.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is Blah Blah masquerading as Sephiroth? The style is very similar and BB has been accused of multiple IDs before. Yawn. Trinnydad still trolling I see.

Quite Sephiroth. Trinnydad is now trolling of course - doubling down. Any interest in debate on the actual points left that one some time ago. Detail has been the one thing guaranteed to bring the froth out in brexiters and expose the folly of the cult they all subscribe to. They just do not care about the costs, really they don't.

The new variant (not correct to call it a new strain) appears to be more infectious and is driving up infections in the SE quickly. Hospitals across the UK are at 90 per cent capacity as it is, so the question is one of a potential surge as people travel from the SE travel all over the country spreading this more infectious strain, leading to a January crisis for the NHS. That is what government is having to consider. Personally, I think that surge is inevitable, and will not be surprised to see a hard lockdown in Jan/Feb. It is worth remembering that the first lockdown was to drive down spread and infection rates from a high R number, to below 1. The policy since has been about managing the R number and trying to keep it below 1. But that has resulted in the R number staying at 1 or thereabouts, over bringing it down further. As a result, the present surge has not gone down significantly enough from the extra November restrictions (I won't call it a lockdown because it wasn't in reality), 400+ people are still dying every day on average, and any surge is going to come on top of that. The peak of Flu intake is also about to hit, although that might actually be lower this year because of social distancing. The data shows that infection rates in schools among teenagers especially, are the issue at the moment. Hence the scrambling to get rapid testing facilities set up over the Christmas break. So the best advice for Christmas would be to keep teenagers away from vulnerable and elderly relatives, and to restrict travel from the SE to other parts of the country. I suspect it will emerge as advice, over any actual restrictions.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm with you Cat all the way. It is time Blah Blah established his credentials. I would guess he doesnt actually work but is "lap top researcher" who revels in the mocking put downs on those he disagrees with. Second thoughts... probably just another a lib-dem dreamer. > > He/she has much in common with the arch remainer MPs (such as Anna Soubry, Sam Gyimah, Dominic Grieve etc) who destroyed the last parliament with eloquent and impassioned nonsense. They later found to their cost that the following election endorsed the Brexit camp with a resounding majority. They are all now yesterday's people. > > Hang on in there Cat, don't cop out and let BB claim another victim. And yet more illustration of my point. No interest in engaging with the real world impacts but resorting to infantile sneering instead. Those MPs were fighting because they could see what what was coming, what IS coming. The following election was as much a rejection of Corbyn as anything else. And when the sh+t hits the fan, as it will with no deal, Boris will be toast. We will be scrambling for a deal, ANY deal by the summer. The EU knows it, which is why it sees no need to cave into every demand of the UK. And the money wasted on this folly so far? More than the total of our membership payments to the EU over our entire 40 year membership. Have a think about that while you are at it.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its the total dismissal (and general mocking from > some) of the nuance of these sort of real world > differences (by most remain commentators on this > thread when I mentioned it 2 weeks ago), which > provides the perfect example of why I can't be > bothered providing further details....becuase the > truth is that many remainers on here really don't > want to consider any opposing arguments on their > merits.... Another predictable whine instead of admitting that tangible benefits are pretty hard to define right now. It is not mockery to ask about the subsidies farmers are going to lose, or the EU regional funding that places like Cornwall will lose, or the inflation that will hit low incomes families hardest on goods and food, or the 3 million jobs that depend on our current EU exports. Hundreds of existing trade agreements lost and how long do you suppose it will take to renegotiate those in the real world eh? You quite frankly don't care about any of that because you have never cared. THAT is why you won't engage in the details, because you have no counter argument to any of it. It reminds of an interview where Farage was asked about the potential loss of the 3000 Airbus jobs in Wales, the only major employer in that town, and he answered simply with 'Airbus is an EU political project'. Didn't give a toss about those jobs. That is the the kind of disgraceful BS that sits behind no deal Brexit and those who push it hardest.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who are you trying to kid! Hungary has bought the > Russian vaccine to placate its population as > Brussels would not approve despatch of vaccines > under their coordinated approval and distribution > regulations. They got it cheap from Putin as he > wants to sow dissent amongst EU members. > If you dont believe me read this:- > https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-countries-may-g > o-their-own-way-on-coronavirus-vaccinations/ > > It's not just us that's frustrated with Brussels. Keep telling yourself that if you must.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't know about that. Watching you twist > yourself into knots, while making this same > ridiculous, myopic claim over and over again is > tangibly changing my life I can assure you. And there you prove my point perfectly. Never interested in any real world detail. The typical Brexit voter deflection we have had to put up with for the last four years. Like I say, you will have nowhere to hide in a no deal Britain.

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Glad to be shot of the lethargic heaving > bureaucratic mess that is the EU having learned > from the media today that the very earliest the > will commence Covid vaccinations will be 27th > December and could well be pushed back into > January. As pointed out to you, the EU is not stopping any country from starting the vaccine if they want to. Hungary has bought the Russian one already for example. But also, you might want to consider that it is going to be summer before the UK gets to vaccinating the over fifties even, and that is if we manage 1 million vaccinations a week. The total number of over 70's, vulnerable, and front line workers that have to be vaccinated first is 23 million. So that puts any complaint about differentials in vaccine programs into perspective. It is not when you start that really matters, but how quickly and wide you can roll out. The EU has decided on a ready to go bigger mass rollout as opposed to a drip feed ramp up. There is sense to that, especially if the vaccine has limited immunity before requiring boosters.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I get overall most people on here disagree with > the whole thing, but surely not every comment > needs to discuss every aspect of the issue? > There's 30 pages of comments on this thread > swinging between specific minuatae and big picture > and back again.... But it is not just about disagreement, it is years of endless avoidance from people like you, who ignore and gloss over the real impacts that are going to affect real people's livelihoods and jobs and prospects. You won't do details. You won't say how long you think people should have to put up with the impacts. You won't even say if you work in a sector that will be affected or not. So spare us yet more vacuous deflection. The fact is that up to 3 million jobs are supported or dependent on our exports to the EU, and many of them in regions where lack of jobs are a real issue. Many more sectors are dependent on collaboration, funding, shared intelligence, data etc etc. All of that is going to take a hit, and there is no indication that this government is even going to replace farming subsidies in full or regional investment lost. They refuse to guarantee it. You can avoid the discussion now, but when it all becomes real from the New Year onwards, there will be no place to hide then.