I understood a vote leave would like increase non European immigration...My wife and I (both English of Indian origin), have as recently as January been racially abused in the street. My wife's parents were told told to fudge off their bus because the country voted to leave. These are extremes of course, but we know most racism is subtle and not at all sophisticated. The anti immigration narrative is not just about control of borders, some is about islamaphobic sentiments but a lot is to do with identity.
Was this not meant for the tactics thread?I hate the press, i really fudging do.
Taking a three month window within that five years and using it is meaningless.
I see the ebb and flow every week, its my job to see it, and I can assure you there is no pattern. Not on a weekly basis, that's why there's a five year average, too even out the peaks and troughs.
I hate the press, i really fudging do.
Was this not meant for the tactics thread?
I have to day this week has seen me start to get narked off with being locked down, had a call today with work and two others said that within the last day they have had an overwhelming sense of "I've had enough", just spoken to another colleague and they said the same, maybe there is some kind of human nature part kicking in now.
I am really starting to question seriously the merits of a lockdown TBH, I know it’s controversial but we’ve become so adept at saving people’s lives from all the cancers and diseases and so now we are like afronted that people who are already in ill health are actually dying.... I know that sounds harsh, that’s not how I mean it and I know there are people behind the death statistics but death is a part of life and I think we are entering the realms of the long term effects of this the greater loss will be the consequence of the lockdown so then it does literally become a choice what is the greater good. People are obsessed now with the death toll of this but I think personally there is a bigger picture to all this that is going to be worse than that specific part of the whole thing.
Sweden are coming through this at the exact same trajectory as the rest of the world give of take and its unlikely their will be crater where their economy used to be which means life for them will have a decent quality to it once this is all over, are we going to be able to say the same?
So whilst everyone concentrates on the death toll league table and use that as the major barometer I would ask whats the point if society is in such a mess after that there is hardly a life for millions to go back to?
My wife and I (both English of Indian origin), have as recently as January been racially abused in the street. My wife's parents were told told to fudge off their bus because the country voted to leave. These are extremes of course, but we know most racism is subtle and not at all sophisticated. The anti immigration narrative is not just about control of borders, some is about islamaphobic sentiments but a lot is to do with identity.
I am a Pakistani Muslim and my wife wears a Hijab and I have a short beard. We have been verbally abused at Legoland, walking along the street and in shopping centres. So yeah I agree. I just feel strongly that the hate is driven by stereotypes in the Mail and the Sun that homogenise us based on actions of a few and then the ignorant base it on looks.
We have even talked about just moving away if post Brexit UK gets worse.
I guess my comment was based on how I see us vs the US where it really is base racism. Maybe sophisticated was a strong word lol
Weirdly happened to read this just after I read your post talking about a similar thing and it had this graph in it which I hadn't seen before - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52543692
I think based on what I've read you either lockdown hard and early and cancel it properly like NZ, Australia, Czech Republic, Denmark etc have done and seem to have come out it with low rates or you go something like Sweden and what the article talks about e.g. Shield the vunerable, put in social distancing, encourage working from hone and minimising travel etc but leave the rest as personal choice.
We've just got caught in some half way house which they say is backed by the science, guess we'll have to wait for the enquiry to find out how and why the crucial decisions were made.
Protect the old and vulnerable health wise and let the rest of the UK go back to normal life
View attachment 8628
I think it was too risky, politically and health wise (NHS) not to have a stringent lockdown (whenever that actually came).It seems simple - but if it was that easy we’d have done it.
I don’t know what you mean three month window. This is the weekly pattern with a spike in winter.
We are in spring and getting a massive number of deaths in consecutive weeks over and above that normally seen. Look at the line in gold.
Well over 20000. It’s a massive outlier indicating excessive deaths in any terms you wish to define.
View attachment 8625
“Backed by the science” was possibly the biggest lie they told. Like there was a definitive right thing to do, and all we had to do was ‘ask science’. It was a means for the people in charge to let go of responsibility - quite the opposite of what was needed.
Moreover, the government then changed tactic, based on some crappy models and social media pressure. Modelling is always imperfect and only as good as the data you feed in.
This was obvious over a month ago and written in this thread. Oh well we can only move forward. The question is, are the people in charge any more competent now?
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
There has been a huge spike in the death rate, that is because of covid over a course of three to six weeks. It's still ongoing.
What we don't yet know is what effect it will have on the annual death rate. There is a very good chance that will not be that much different than normal. There could well be a large dip later on in the year.
We don't know, no one knows and tbh I wouldn't trust anyone who claims they with any certainty that they do.
Because a large proportion of those who have died would probably have died in the coming months anyway.Why is the timeframe of a year of any relevance?
Because a large proportion of those who have died would probably have died in the coming months anyway.
I suspect (assuming this is all but gone in the coming weeks/months) that we'll see a heavily reduced death rate towards the end of the year - especially as those closest to death will already have succumbed.Obviously. The excessive week by week numbers though will show how far forward mortality has been pushed.
So it is valid to say in some weeks we see grossly excessive deaths in relation to the five year average. And counter to this, later in the year we may expect to see periods with a reduced number of deaths.
It’s an extremely useful and simple measure.