whats wrong with going to a greasy spoon, should not go to pubs for breakfasts, its just wrong.Derek27 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 12:08 pmA full English breakfast! Just wish I was up early enough more often to get one.to75ne wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:20 amwhats the point of a pub with no beer or whiskey.superfrank wrote: ↑Tue Oct 27, 2020 11:13 pmSturgeon has announced a new 5-tier system (no doubt because Boris' one has only 3).
Level 3 says pubs can open but not serve alcohol. What next?... offices open but no talking?
Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer
- firlandsfarm
- Posts: 2722
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
Have you tried the Toby "All you can eat" for less than £5?
I find the very thought of eating as much as you can quite stomach-turning.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:25 pmHave you tried the Toby "All you can eat" for less than £5?
I heard of a bunch of students that ate so much pizza the restaurant ran out, and they even had the cheek to complain! It was comforting to know that the manageress took no nonsense from them and kicked them all out.
- firlandsfarm
- Posts: 2722
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
You don't have to eat all you can you can interpret it as "eat as much as you want". I will always remember when my mum returned from a trip to the USA to see her sister. They took her to an all you can eat with a difference. To combat the waste that is inevitable in these establishments they had 2 rules ... you could only fill your plate once, no return trips and if you didn't eat it all what you left was weighed and you paid a penalty on the bill for wasting food! I thought it was a brilliant idea.
Sometimes all that you want is all that you can eat.firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:24 pmYou don't have to eat all you can you can interpret it as "eat as much as you want". I will always remember when my mum returned from a trip to the USA to see her sister. They took her to an all you can eat with a difference. To combat the waste that is inevitable in these establishments they had 2 rules ... you could only fill your plate once, no return trips and if you didn't eat it all what you left was weighed and you paid a penalty on the bill for wasting food! I thought it was a brilliant idea.
I don't agree with filling up your plate once, you may not know how much you want to eat. But charging for excessive waste is definitely a good idea, not charging somebody for trying a portion of food that they didn't like.
meanwhile at our local shopping complex, work is underway for a new adjoining cinema.. go figure?
https://bit.ly/2G8Wsux
also it amazes me how different places of employment are dealing with this god forsaken virus, where I work there is a lot to be desired with regards H&S in combatting Covid, yet where my missus works it’s hard to fault how they’re dealing with it?
I have had coronavirus symptoms for 1 week now (age 28). First a sore throat, blocked nose then fever and chills, feeling tired, then unable to taste anything for a few days. Now and again, usually after moving too fast I can feel my breathing is harder and the cough can be quite nasty. The symptoms seem to be getting better now. Overall it feels like a slightly worse than average flu, I never recall experiencing loss of taste before. The main issue is the effect on breathing which I imagine would be worse for people who already have some breathing difficulties whether due to age, smoking or another reason.
I think that shutting down the country and devasting almost everyone and everything for a virus which is 20% worse than the average flu at most is the biggest availability cascade (overreaction) in history. My opinion is based on the statistics which I'm sure as traders you know is the much more rational approach to use as opposed to the emotional driven media "people are dying", yeah 1500 people die every day in the UK under normal circumstances. There is now quite a lot of data such as Sweden which used minimal social restrictions and didn't have much of a different result. If you look at the bigger picture you will find that the death rates are no higher than normal. I believe the last two seasons have been particularly mild with less deaths so now we are now experiencing some regression to the mean. I believe the government and media are using the overtesting and normal seasonal death rate increases to show upwards curves and scare people. The Betfair equivalent is the market noise which is less relevant than the overall trend when looking at the bigger picture.
There is also the logical side of arguments such as there never truely was a lockdown because there have been hundred of billions of social interactions in supermarkets and other indoor spaces over the last few months with many of that before masks were even introduced, yet the Nightingale hospitals were basically never used. The lockdown has just made it worse for other health conditions which are a bigger threat than the actual pandemic virus.
I think the government simply doesn't want to admit they were wrong after spending 11 or 12 figures of public funds on something which hasn't really achieved much of a different end result, so they are carrying on the act. I'm pretty sure there plan will be to drag it on until the natural death rate falls next spring or summer and then they will use this to claim victory. Then ask everyone to pay them back for saving them by raising max income tax to 60%, VAT to 25% and the retirement age to 80. At least those on 60% PC won't feel so bad then
I think that shutting down the country and devasting almost everyone and everything for a virus which is 20% worse than the average flu at most is the biggest availability cascade (overreaction) in history. My opinion is based on the statistics which I'm sure as traders you know is the much more rational approach to use as opposed to the emotional driven media "people are dying", yeah 1500 people die every day in the UK under normal circumstances. There is now quite a lot of data such as Sweden which used minimal social restrictions and didn't have much of a different result. If you look at the bigger picture you will find that the death rates are no higher than normal. I believe the last two seasons have been particularly mild with less deaths so now we are now experiencing some regression to the mean. I believe the government and media are using the overtesting and normal seasonal death rate increases to show upwards curves and scare people. The Betfair equivalent is the market noise which is less relevant than the overall trend when looking at the bigger picture.
There is also the logical side of arguments such as there never truely was a lockdown because there have been hundred of billions of social interactions in supermarkets and other indoor spaces over the last few months with many of that before masks were even introduced, yet the Nightingale hospitals were basically never used. The lockdown has just made it worse for other health conditions which are a bigger threat than the actual pandemic virus.
I think the government simply doesn't want to admit they were wrong after spending 11 or 12 figures of public funds on something which hasn't really achieved much of a different end result, so they are carrying on the act. I'm pretty sure there plan will be to drag it on until the natural death rate falls next spring or summer and then they will use this to claim victory. Then ask everyone to pay them back for saving them by raising max income tax to 60%, VAT to 25% and the retirement age to 80. At least those on 60% PC won't feel so bad then
- firlandsfarm
- Posts: 2722
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 8:20 am
The Government had to do something because of the flack they were getting from those opposed to doing nothing. They were heavily criticised by the media over the "herd immunity" line, then heavily criticised again over the number of deaths compared to others in Europe ... they were forced into doing something.alexmr2 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 3:16 amI think the government simply doesn't want to admit they were wrong after spending 11 or 12 figures of public funds on something which hasn't really achieved much of a different end result, so they are carrying on the act. I'm pretty sure there plan will be to drag it on until the natural death rate falls next spring or summer and then they will use this to claim victory. Then ask everyone to pay them back for saving them by raising max income tax to 60%, VAT to 25% and the retirement age to 80. At least those on 60% PC won't feel so bad then
It's what I refer to as the criticise culture we live with. When something is announced look for an 'expert' who disagrees and interview them. Current evidence ... look at France. We were told how much better France were dealing with it but there is no comment now that France now has 5th highest number of infections in the world. UK doing better than France (or others) does not make good news, much better to criticise and hound!
-
- Posts: 1067
- Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:38 am
Your not proposing they should have done nothing surely?firlandsfarm wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 10:57 am
The Government had to do something because of the flack they were getting from those opposed to doing nothing. They were heavily criticised by the media over the "herd immunity" line, then heavily criticised again over the number of deaths compared to others in Europe ... they were forced into doing something.
It's what I refer to as the criticise culture we live with. When something is announced look for an 'expert' who disagrees and interview them. Current evidence ... look at France. We were told how much better France were dealing with it but there is no comment now that France now has 5th highest number of infections in the world. UK doing better than France (or others) does not make good news, much better to criticise and hound!
They were faced with a significant risk (still are) and needed to act. They should be held accountable for those actions.
Bottom line is given the current infection rates is that they have failed and a good measure of that failure is the ongoing spend of £110bn on test track & trace systems that are barely adequate, impact on the economy & number of deaths.
Just read a BBC article that quoted some analysis from Imperial College London that said the area where I live (Edinburgh) which is currently tier 3 could be tier 0 (its a scottish thing) within two weeks - although I won't be able to travel out of Edin as surrounded by higher infection zones !
Anyhow, if its a reasonable projection must be some good news in there somewhere if you can go down through the tiers so quickly...
I hope you get well quickly with no lasting problems.
That's basically why the country has been and maybe again shut down.
It may be 20% worse for you but what about people who died from it and orphans, what percentage would you put on that?
You say you rely on statistics but haven't published your statistical data: 300 people a day are dying of Covid at present, how many die in total and what's normal? People who state the maths and reasoning, whether you agree with it or not, are at least speaking their brains, whereas you and many others appear to be speaking your heart.alexmr2 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 3:16 amMy opinion is based on the statistics which I'm sure as traders you know is the much more rational approach to use as opposed to the emotional driven media "people are dying", yeah 1500 people die every day in the UK under normal circumstances. There is now quite a lot of data such as Sweden which used minimal social restrictions and didn't have much of a different result. If you look at the bigger picture you will find that the death rates are no higher than normal. I believe the last two seasons have been particularly mild with less deaths so now we are now experiencing some regression to the mean. I believe the government and media are using the overtesting and normal seasonal death rate increases to show upwards curves and scare people. The Betfair equivalent is the market noise which is less relevant than the overall trend when looking at the bigger picture.
Can't argue with that. Clearly the flat-line graph below confirms the lockdown made no difference, or are the figures made up and all the intensive care news reports were simply using actors?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
I think the initial lockdown was completely justified, but now there is enough data (mainly the approach and results of Sweden) that to continue restrictions is causing more problems than good. I think from July things should have went back to normal with vulnerable people being given options and funding to shield if they choose (many would rather take their chances than live their final years locked away ready to die).sionascaig wrote: ↑Fri Oct 30, 2020 11:25 amYour not proposing they should have done nothing surely?