BS: UK thread, Politics and political

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 02:54 AM

According to some reports Rishi Sunak is preparing to wind down coronavirus furlough scheme from July.

There was only ever one rationale for the scheme: to ensure the businesses concerned and the people furloughed stayed together to ease the businesses restarting. So unless the lockdown is released enough for that to happen, all the money concerned has been thrown away for no purpose. And then the whole population must feel confident enough to use the services these businesses provide. And they must, of course, have enough money to do so.

As we have said before, reopening the economy is no simple matter.   But to end or reduce the furlough scheme without very precise targeting will have wasted the whole idea - which, let us recall, most of the "lefties" on these thread welcomed, and did the "righties". (It was on the previous incarnation, I think. Or possibly the one before, I lose track.)

There has been some essentially pointless speculation of what would have happened if Labour had won the election. One thing I am certain of is that had Labour won, and pursued exactly the financial policy Rishi Sunak did, we would hear that "Labour came in, wrecked the budget, forced businesses to the wall and created mass unemployment" for the next thirty years or so...

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 03:44 AM

"You are more likely to die of Coronavirus if you're a man."
Everything on your list and much more can be applied to mot other ailment in Britain today Steve - you may add general life expectancy to that list
Sam Larner had it summed up perfectly with the old Norfolk rhyme

"If health were a thing that money could buy
The rich would live and the poor would die"

Things have got worse rather than better - pretty provable with statistics too

The main problem now, Car homes, appears to bear out the accusations that Dom the Scumbag suggested that the weakest and most vulnerable in society should be sacrificed for the 'greater good' - it seems to be 'coming to pass' even though it was vehemently denied by the nodding dogs
The Government appears also to be dancing to big Business's tune and pushing through a relaxation of security measures while the crisis is still at it's peak
Madness
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:05 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 05 May 20 - 06:02 PM
Why the anger?? are you overweight?
As the Clinical Director of the Weight Management and Wellness Center at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh and Associate Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine has said:
"Telling overweight people that eating too much is the root cause of their problem is met with disappointment, denial, and even anger.
Why is it so hard for some people to accept they are obese because they eat too much? Consider that I’ve never heard of a patient with lung cancer or emphysema deny having smoked too much. Nor have I even once heard of a patient with a sexually transmitted disease claim to be chaste, but obesity and its indisputable connection to overeating has much worse implications. The Catholic Church divided sin into two categories: venial or minor, and capital or deadly. Gluttony, together with lust, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride, is among the latter."

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:22 AM

The main problem now, Car homes
My   car does not have a home. My garage is used   for far   more important things.   I   would have thought covid-19    was   a tad more of a problem. Perhaps all   the rain in the west of Ireland creates a different perspective.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:53 AM

Moderator, I know the post hasn't been there for very long, but please consider removing the troll post of 04.05 AM.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 05:05 AM

Jim, in line (I think) with the sentiment of your post, the point I'm trying to make is that the middle of a pandemic (one incidentally, that is much worse in this country than it needs to be because of the Tory government's ineptitude) is not the time to start pointing fingers at people with medical conditions, whatever their cause. A fundamental principle of the NHS is that it doesn't judge. You won't be turned away suffering from a heart attack or diabetes because you weigh 18 stones. You won't be refused treatment for lung cancer or COPD because you've been a smoker. You get the same treatment as everyone else. You may be given friendly advice as to your lifestyle. We acknowledge that bad lifestyle choices can arise through poverty, ignorance or poor education. Instead of bollocking people for being obese, I could instead say (I won't) that we should shut down all KFCs and McShitteries and supermarket cake aisles...

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 05:41 AM

Totally in line with what I'm saying Steve
All I would add is that if this emergency were to end tomorrow (it won't of course), it's repercussions will be felt for a long time, probably decades
One of the major dangers is that the government, given it's built-in philosophy, will attempt to pay for those repercussions by putting the pressue on those who can least afford it
Does anybody seriously believe the wealthy will be asked to dig into their bank-balances to make up for what the nation is already losing ?
Yes - you can get cancer treatment without hving your history dragged in - how long is that likely to last when the purse holders are having to prioritise
This is why I added the Dom the Div policy to my posting

Just read about the Irish/Choctaw nation charity - still wiping the tears from my eyes
Surely the most human story to emerge from thois virus mess
Might open a thread on it as a morale booster - it shows the world is still lagely populated by human beings

CHOCTAW NATION CHARITY
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 06:15 AM

By the way, almost every Tory MP supported Tony Blair in voting for the war.
The actual vote:
Labour Party (254), Conservative Party (146), Ulster Unionist Party (6), Democratic Unionist Party (5), Independent Conservative (1)


It would be more correct to say that for every Tory supporter there were nearly   2 labour supporters of the motion. Labour having an 88 seat   overall majority. (how times change!)
Silver tongued tony obviously had a way with words.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 06:38 AM

Two Tory MPs voted against and 17 abstained. 84 Labour MPs voted against and 67 abstained. Quoting the actual numbers is better than providing circuitous interpretations. And Labour's parliamentary overall majority was 167. Glad to be of help.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 06:56 AM

And I'd have been better saying that the overwhelming majority of Tories voted for the war. When I said "almost every Tory MP" I remembered the two demurrers but neglected to include abstentions. But my point stands. In fact, a far greater proportion of Tory MPs than Labour MPs supported the war.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 07:03 AM

And Labour's parliamentary overall majority was 167.>

Thus times change even more. Thank you for making the point even more dramatic.
How far have the "mighty" fallen!

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 May 20 - 07:42 AM

It’s the nature of politics - things change. And sooner or later, they change back. There’s nothing permanent in the political world - remember the well-deserved fate of The Beast of Grantham, shafted by her own cronies.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 07:59 AM

remember the well-deserved fate of The Beast of Grantham, shafted by her own cronies.

or more recently the corbynated clown, rightly shafted by the informed British Electorate

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 06 May 20 - 08:09 AM

The wrong man for the job. ‘Twas ever thus.
But things change in politics, and change again they will.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 08:18 AM

"And sooner or later, they change back"
Actually that's not exactly true Baccie
Things seldom, if ever return to where they were, especially after a crisis
Incredible progress was made in Britain after WW1 much of which was lost by the depression
The role of women (albeit upper and middle class ones) never really returned to as they were, but it took a deal with the devil on the part of the Suffragettes to send young man to their deaths in the tranches to achieve that small step
World War Twe gave us the Welfare State and other advantages never quite whittled away by the Tories since, but they'r doing their best
Conservationism by definition means keeping things as they are
Our present Tory supporter is a case in point - he would rather talk about 17 year old Labour politics rather than the cock-ups that are being made as we speak

Johnson has just apologised for the inexcusable care-home fiasco and his colleague is still defending the equally fiascopic testing non-policy
I don't believe history repeats itself but, with the Tories, some things never change, as we are learning daily, to our cost
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 08:55 AM

he would rather talk about 17 year old Labour politics rather than the cock-ups that are being made as we speak

As a response to a   30 year old Tory politics being dredged up actually.
Johnson has just apologised for the inexcusable care-home fiasco and his colleague is still defending the equally fiascopic testing non-policy
Care homes have always been very vulnerable to infection, hardly surprising as they house people with health conditions. If able bodied they would be unlikely to be in a care home. At least in the UK the risk is recognised and acted on - unlike Spain where some care homes were abandoned and the residents left to die.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/03/corpses-elderly-abandoned-spanish-care-homes-200324141255435.html
Hardly a care home fiasco after all the risk to vulnerable members of society is well known and the NHS has produced leaflets specifically targeting care homes.
https://phw.nhs.wales/services-and-teams/beat-flu/resources/other/beat-flu-information-pack-for-care-homes-english/

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 08:59 AM

A similar "fiasco" in Ireland but he utters not a word


https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0501/1135937-coronavirus-ireland/

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 08:59 AM

People are now dying in Care Homes possibly because Johnson is following Scumming's suggestion that they should be a low priority - not thirty years ago - NOW
Perhaps you might like to discuss the generation that was unnecessarily slaughtered in WW1 - that seems to be the direction your heading to ?
Or maybe whataboutism is more your metier
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 09:07 AM

>I>People are now dying in Care Homes possibly because Johnson is following Scumming's suggestion that they should be a low priority - not thirty years ago - NOW



You   can hardly make Boris or the esteemed Mr Cummins responsible for what happens in Ireland as well. Surely even you cannot believe that, or can you?

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 09:28 AM

"Care homes have always been very vulnerable to infection, hardly surprising as they house people with health conditions."

Care homes are vulnerable to infection because there are very high levels of staffing who are coming and going 24/7 in shifts, and because quite large numbers of people are close together, and because it's a challenge keeping on top of the stringent hygiene requirements, both personal and communal. It doesn't help that the staff are just about the lowest-paid in the land, receive only the most basic training and are daily confronted with some tasks that many of us would find unpleasant.

You are not necessarily more vulnerable to infection simply because you have "health conditions," though you may suffer more severely should you acquire an infection. The distinction between your remark and the reality is the very reason we have such a crisis now in care homes. The care-nothing Tories expect the oldies to get more bugs and just shrug. Had the reality been faced up to at the beginning of this crisis, we wouldn't have the devastating situation in care homes that we now have.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:14 AM

"Mr Cummins responsible for what happens in Ireland as well."
You mean the generosity that is being shown by the Irish people of course
They certainly aren't responsible for the humanity that still exists here - their types tried to wipe that out with starvation a century and a half ago

What Seve said about overworked, underpaid and unappreciated care-home workers - with knobs on
One of the things Ireland is streets ahead on is the respect shown for the elderly - despite right wing Governments and a somewhat indifferent younger generation that probably lost that respect through emigration and picking up bad habits
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:24 AM

The care-nothing Tories expect the oldies to get more bugs and just shrug. Had the reality been faced up to at the beginning of this crisis, we wouldn't have the devastating situation in care homes that we now have.

So let me get this right. It is all the tories fault.

According to the Guardian Belgium counts all coronavirus deaths outside hospitals in its daily statistics: deaths in care homes account for 53% of the total.
According to the Irish Times:Nursing homes account for 50 per cent of coronavirus deaths in Ireland
The guardian again:Snapshot data from varying official sources shows that in Italy, Spain, France, Ireland and Belgium between 42% and 57% of deaths from the virus have been happening in homes, according to the report by academics based at the London School of Economics (LSE).
Those tories get everywhere do they not?
OR is your allegation just a totally unfounded slur on the government efforts. Even the lefty Guardian cannot support your accusation!

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Rain Dog
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:43 AM

Care homes contain a lot of older people who are more at risk from dying from the virus.

Social care is something that needs to be looked at. It has been avoided by most governments here in the UK. It would be nice to think that the major parties would try to get together to come up with a long term plan. I am not sure that I will live long enough to ever see that happening in the UK. Whichever party is in charge they seemed happy enough to leave it for the next government to tackle.

Jim posted his usual "One of the things Ireland is streets ahead on is the respect shown for the elderly - despite right wing Governments and a somewhat indifferent younger generation that probably lost that respect through emigration and picking up bad habits"

Streets ahead? I don't think so. Then you blame that on right wing (do you ever see any other sort?) governments, and emigration? MMmmm now I wonder which country that they emigrate to that is the cause of that?

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:45 AM

Maybe that is not an accurate quotation in (or from) the Guardian. Elsewhere it is being reported:

Of Belgium’s registered deaths, 44 percent died in hospital (and were tested). The majority, 54 percent, died in a nursing home — and only in 7.8 percent of those cases was COVID-19 confirmed as the cause. (Yes, I know 44%+54% is less than a 100% - some deaths are in neither hospital nor care homes.)


Agreed, then, 54% are in nursing homes. But less than ten percent are confirmed to be because of covid-19, if those other reports are correct.

Everyone, including in these threads and the government spokesmen and their scientists, is saying international comparisons have to be done with extreme care because they do not all count the figures in the same way. Belgium is a very good example where the counting includes more than then UK system does.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:47 AM

unfounded slur on the government efforts"
Johnson has just admitted that the Tories have dropped a bollock on care Homes and apologised for it
How dare you contradict our glorious leader ?
You really are asking for the Scummings Frog March treatment
Or maybe Johnson is still delirious after his bout of the Dreaded Lurgi !!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:50 AM

The Guardian has been by far the most critical of the government of all newspapers, and a poll published yesterday (in a letter to subscribers with a graph that this website won't let me reproduce) showed that it is the newspaper most trusted on Coronavirus reporting, by a considerable margin. Maybe that's lookupable somewhere. Is the situation in care homes the Tory government's fault? Absolutely it it is, one hundred percent. The Tories have been in charge for ten years. They have made promise after broken promise that they would fix the care sector. Instead, they have done nothing and have sat back whilst the ageing population grows ever larger. The situation in care homes was a disaster waiting to happen, and, as with every other aspect of this pandemic, the Tories have been way behind the curve every step of the way. Well, I suppose you could always blame God. Maybe you think the buck should stop with those feckless enough to allow themselves to get into such a state that they need care, a bit like those fatties...

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 10:54 AM

From the letter to subscribers:

"...an Oxford University survery of 2,700 people in the UK found that Guardian coverage of Covid-19 has been substantially better than that of its newspaper rivals with twice as many Britons impressed by our work on the pandemic compared to any other British newspaper. This is a hugely satisfying verdict given how hard our teams have been working over the past six weeks. In a note to staff, our editor-in-chief Katharine Viner said: "Thank you very much, once again, for your brilliant work through this crisis. Your energy, resilience and commitment are inspiring."

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 11:01 AM

A bit more:

"The Guardian’s coverage of the coronavirus outbreak is considered to be substantially better than that of any other British newspaper, according to a University of Oxford study looking at the UK population’s attitudes to news during the lockdown.

According to the research, twice as many Britons said they felt the Guardian was doing a “good job” covering the pandemic compared with the Times, its nearest rival.

The Guardian’s website was also one of the most-read sources for information on the outbreak, second only to BBC News. This fits with internal traffic statistics which show the Guardian has consistently reached record audiences over the last two months, while also seeing a surge in reader contributions to fund its journalism.

Other outlets fared less well but the Sun and the Mail were the only national newspapers where more people felt they were doing a “bad job” than approved of their reporting on the pandemic.

The survey by YouGov for the University of Oxford’s Reuters Institute also found that the BBC’s output continues to dominate online news consumption in the UK, with 36% of the population saying they had turned to the public service broadcaster’s website for coronavirus coverage.

Around 16% said they had visited the Guardian’s website, with Sky News and MailOnline in joint third place on 9%.

TV broadcasters continue to outrank all national newspapers in overall trust ratings and audience levels, aided by their far wider reach."

There's more, and there are are caveats, if you can be arsed to look it up for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 11:42 AM

TV broadcasters continue to outrank all national newspapers in overall trust ratings and audience levels, aided by their far wider reach."
YouGov figures show British trust in the press to tell the truth has fallen, with less than half believing BBC news journalists are honest and impartial

As the BBC responds to claims of bias following its coverage of the general election, YouGov polling reveals that faith in BBC News journalists to tell the truth has dropped, but the trend is not unique to the broadcaster, with trust in journalists falling across the board.

Less than half of Britons (44%) now say they trust the institution to tell the truth despite its public charter to remain politically neutral. This is a fall of seven percentage points since October.
Britons see the tabloid press as the least trustworthy, with half (51%) now saying they wouldn’t trust the newspapers in this bracket to tell the truth at all, and another third (34%) saying they wouldn’t
trust the paper much, for a total of 85% of UK adults who don’t fully
trust the tabloids. Over half have little trust i the upmmarket papers.

This mmakes the guardian figures rather misleading. and I can provide the link

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/12/16/do-britons-trust-press

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 11:49 AM

Not as "rather misleading" as the fact that you are presenting us with an entirely different survey that was carried out before Coronavirus. Or perhaps you didn't notice.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:00 PM

Here is the latest one:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/media/articles-reports/2020/04/29/no-trust-media-has-not-collapsed-because-coronavir
This is where   we discerning tories have a lower level of trust than the gullible left.

Labour voters have become more trusting of media, while the latest YouGov poll reveals that trust has fallen among Conservative voters over the past week. While this partisan gap is quite typical for trust in BBC journalists (who since 2010 have usually been viewed more positively by Labour supporters), it has been turned on its head for broadsheets. Traditionally Conservative voters have tended to be more trusting of upmarket newspapers, but this is no longer the case – with 46% of Labour voters saying they trust journalists from these papers, but just 29% of Conservative voters saying so (a nine-point swing on the partisan balance of opinion from December).
Since no sensible tory even gives bin space to the guardian, whatever it may say is of no interest   to the ruling party or its membership.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:04 PM

Steve
It neds to be remembereed that UGov is a right wing set up organisation which canvasses for information among the same type of people
It also needs to be remembered taht the poster here brushes aside all surveys, Government statements political opinions and press reports that don't suit him or don't come from criminal bloggers as "fake News
I'm sure you know tat
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:10 PM

Maybe that is not an accurate quotation in (or from) the Guardian.
Then again maybe it is.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/13/half-of-coronavirus-deaths-happen-in-care-homes-data-from-eu-suggests
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/is-comparing-covid-19-death-rates-across-europe-helpful-

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:30 PM

"Maybe that is not an accurate quotation in (or from) the Guardian."
One of those reports is early a month old - the other had been overtaken by recent admissions and events
In this situation the en=vents alter daily
Johnson made his confession today - I kow he is prone to telling porkies, but only when they are in his interest
How about addressing stated facts thather than opinions
Did he lie ?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:34 PM

Mind you, he has promised to pu things right on Monday
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/boris-johnson-drops-clear-hint-coronavirus-lockdown-measures-will-change-on-monday-as-he-confirms-sunday-speech

Wonder how many people will die between now and then !!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:39 PM

Here we go again slagging off yougov. Do you not ever get bored?

A King’s College survey found that a majority of people (58%) think the government has adapted well to the changing scientific information and situation. Almost 90% support the lockdown measures while 81% support the increased powers given to police.
and a little piccie fromm the Sky news survey where it paints a thousand words and none of it good for newspapers
https://i2.wp.com/blogsmedia.lse.ac.uk/blogs.dir/19/files/2020/04/Screenshot-2020-04-24-at-09.23.10.png?ssl=1

and   a little gem from guido that could be most informative:
How can the UK economy get back on its post-pandemic feet? How will the government address the massive debt mountain created in the wake of coronavirus?   And how quickly should Britain return to work?
https://order-order.com/2020/05/06/from-rishi-to-rags/

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 12:40 PM

Maybe that is not an accurate quotation in (or from) the Guardian.
Then again maybe it is.

Or maybe you have highlighted the wrong bit: Notice that in (or from)?

Why do you think I put both of those, rather than just one? I will answer: because I thought it possible that it was an accurate quotation from the Guardian, but that the Guardian had not seen and/or reported the fact that only 7.8% of the deaths in care homes had be confirmed as due to the virus.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 01:13 PM

DMcG I think you attach a reliability to the cause of death on a certificate that simply does not exist. From the link:
Death certificates from 433 autopsied hospital patients were reviewed and matched against the results of post-mortem examinations. Significant discrepancies between the two documents were observed in 50% of patients. In 25%, the immediate cause of death was incorrectly stated on the certificate, having been assigned to a different organ system in the majority of those cases. In 33%, there was disagreement on major disease other than the immediate cause of death. In 9%, the death certificate was signed before the autopsy was performed. The extent of disagreement was largely independent of whether the certificate was signed before or after the autopsy. We conclude that: (1) there is a significant discrepancy between autopsy diagnoses and entries on death certificates; (2) disagreement is not due to unavailability of autopsy data at the time of completion of the certificate; (3) death certificates should be completed or amended utilizing data gained at autopsy.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1871957
"lthough confirmed cases are reliant on a positive laboratory confirmation of the COVID-19 test, a laboratory diagnosis may not be required for it to be listed as the cause of death. In the UK guidelines, for example, it makes clear that practitioners should complete death certificates to the best of their knowledge, stating that “if before death the patient had symptoms typical of COVID19 infection, but the test result has not been received, it would be satisfactory to give ‘COVID-19’ as the cause of death, and then share the test result when it becomes available. In the circumstances of there being no swab, it is satisfactory to apply clinical judgement.”

This means a positive COVID-19 test result is not required for a death to be registered as COVID-19. In some circumstances, depending on national guidelines, medical practitioners can record COVID-19 deaths if they think the signs and symptoms point towards this as the underlying cause."
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths
It is nnot   a perfect world.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 01:28 PM

The film has just been put up of Johnson admitting Starmer "is quite right of course" over the Care Home scandal - the fact that he has announced a meeting on Monday to DISCUSS IT
The fact that he has called this meeting in five days time prompt's two thoughts -
1. Why hasn't there been one called before this reached the crisis stage it obviouly has?
and
2. Why leave it for five days if the situation has reached the stage where the Prime Minister has been forced to apologise for it?   

Wonder what UGov have to say about that?
Answers on a postcard.....
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 01:55 PM


DMcG I think you attach a reliability to the cause of death on a certificate that simply does not exist.

You are free to think that if you wish. I don't, because I have been dealing with data uncertainty for a very long time indeed. Pretty much all my working life has involved data of dubious quality, inconsistent definitions, different people interpreting the same rules in different ways and so on and so forth. But that's what you think, fine by me.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 20 - 01:58 PM

"Streets ahead? I don't think so. Then you blame that on right wing (do you ever see any other sort?)"
Not when their policies are blindingly obvious RD
Go look at Irish homelessness policy that has caused mass marches - as has water taxation - as has showing arses too vulture capitalism by allowing companies like Goldman Sachs to buy up rented property, evict the tenants
Left wing parties would have done none of that
At the last election the Irish people overwhenlimingly supposted left wing policies with their vote
Now the established parties are forming a coalition to make sure this will not happen
It really isn't rocket science - or delusion
Jim

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 03:28 PM

DMcG I am not about to argue with you. I also have dealt with data all my working life,compiling,collating and analysing. I have yet to encounter 100% accuracy. Any internet search on the accuracy of death certificates uncovers a host of articles in the literature, none particularly flattering when it comes to a discussion of their accuracy.
According to Geriatric Medicine:
In the United States it is estimated that the rate of major errors (eg, incorrect cause of death [CoD], incorrect manner of death) found on death certificates completed at academic institutions is approximately 33% to 40%.1 Internationally, this rate at some hospitals rises as high as 80%. I find it hard to believe they would make these figures up.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:05 PM

"I also have dealt with data all my working life,compiling,collating and analysing."

Well yes. However, your vast experience didn't prevent you from confusing one rather simple set of data with another earlier today, did it? As you think the Guardian is so unreliable, etc., perhaps you'd be a good fit if you went and worked there...

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:34 PM

I have never claimed to be infallible. Working on my phone it is not easy to type and cross check things, so I don't know which two data sets I confused, but if I did I did.

when I said a fact might have been omitted from an article in the Guardian what I had in mind was nothing to with deliberate distortions or errors. It is simply that every newspaper article will include what they think are the most salient points. There is always a judgement how important a detail is, and if space is limited (or time to write it is limited) a less salient point may be omitted. You may include more and more and more of these points in your article, but the need to publish forces you to draw a line somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:34 PM

At the last election the Irish people overwhenlimingly supposted left wing policies with their vote

        Fianna Fáil38%
        Sinn Féin 37%
               Fine Gael 35%
SINN FEIN leader Mary Lou McDonald has launched a stinging attack on the European Union, accusing it of being "no great friend to Ireland" during the 2008 financial crisis, in a strong indication of growing euroscepticism in her country.
So if the left kick out Varadkar how soon before a referendum on leaving the EU??
Could get interesting!

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Iains
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:37 PM

you'd be a good fit if you went and worked there...

I do have standards you know! There is the press, and the gutter press.

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: DMcG
Date: 06 May 20 - 04:39 PM

And as proof of my lack of infallibility I think.I completely misunderstood you post, Steve. My apologies!

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 20 - 05:39 PM

That's OK, DMcG. I was puzzled for about 28 seconds!

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 20 - 03:26 AM

Ireland now Iains
I take it you've laid off defending the Tory's lethal policy on the virus then
Who's to blame you
A pretty comprehensive history here
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-path-speci/special-report-johnson-listened-to-his-scientists-about-coronavirus-but-they-were-slow-to-sound-the-alarm-idUSKBN21P1VF

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: UK thread, Politics and political
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 May 20 - 03:38 AM

i think jeremy would have acted quicker as regards a lockdown. i doubt if cheltenham would have happened.the party is more concerned about people and less worried about safeguarding businesses, ironically in the long term having an early lockdown does both of these things witness new zealand.