Discussion:
Nice empty tube
(too old to reply)
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-07 10:53:14 UTC
Permalink
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be interested to
know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay home
like good little citizens.
Recliner
2020-05-07 12:55:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be interested to
know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay home
like good little citizens.
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
tim...
2020-05-07 14:24:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be interested to
know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay home
like good little citizens.
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
not when I travelled

but I didn't venture into central London

tim
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-07 15:29:39 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 07 May 2020 13:55:11 +0100
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be interested to
know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed stations - quite
quick.
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay home
like good little citizens.
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
Nope. Plus there are barely any staff around and I didn't see the BTP once.
Marland
2020-05-08 01:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111



GH
Recliner
2020-05-08 02:01:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.

There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Robin
2020-05-08 07:14:31 UTC
Permalink
On 08/05/2020 03:01, Recliner wrote:
<snip>
Post by Recliner
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Hyperbole has it's place but I don't think that was one of them. The
ONS estimated 2.4 per cent of the UK population was over 85. Even
after allowing for immigration that's over 1.5 million likely to have
memories of VE Day. And if you reckon 750,000 over 85s have probably
died in the past couple of months....
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
Robin
2020-05-08 07:58:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robin
<snip>
Post by Recliner
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Hyperbole has it's place but I don't think that was one of them.  The
ONS estimated  2.4 per cent of the UK population was over 85.  Even
after allowing for immigration that's over 1.5 million likely to have
memories of VE Day. And if you reckon 750,000 over 85s have probably
died in the past couple of months....
<sigh>
similarly apostrophes have their place and that weren't one of them :(
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
Recliner
2020-05-08 11:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robin
<snip>
Post by Recliner
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Hyperbole has it's place but I don't think that was one of them. The
ONS estimated 2.4 per cent of the UK population was over 85. Even
after allowing for immigration that's over 1.5 million likely to have
memories of VE Day. And if you reckon 750,000 over 85s have probably
died in the past couple of months....
I was thinking of older people with wartime memories, who knew what VE-Day
was all about, not people who were just children at the time.
Bryan Morris
2020-05-08 12:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks

In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85

But then what would I expect from you
--
Bryan Morris
Recliner
2020-05-08 13:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
Bryan Morris
2020-05-08 13:47:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all
nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government

But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves

But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
--
Bryan Morris
Recliner
2020-05-08 14:02:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
What political point was I making? It was an entirely non-political
remark. You're the one who's trying to make it political, and being
thoroughly offensive in the process.

I don't recall ever being impolite to you (not that you're a regular here),
so what's brought this sudden attack on?
Bryan Morris
2020-05-08 19:05:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been
reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
What political point was I making? It was an entirely non-political
remark. You're the one who's trying to make it political, and being
thoroughly offensive in the process.
I don't recall ever being impolite to you (not that you're a regular here),
so what's brought this sudden attack on?
I was active on Usenet in the nineties and noughties , largely on
(though not exclusively) uk.*, Demon.*, alt.*, and soc.* newsgroups
which were thriving. Though there were trolls and unnecessary cross
posting things were generally good natured and in fact some ISPs even
suspended users from posting to groups if they proved to be causing
problems.

Those days are long gone.

I sometimes browse some groups (including this one) and found that the
majority of Usenet posters are now the same ones on all. Posting often
just to prove they can, cross posting (WTF has an amateur radio group
got to do with politics) just because they can. I can see why the late
{R} (who I think may have coined the phrase Fuckwit) formed ULM I popped
into uk.legal recently and saw that the trolls, fuckwits, crossposters
were still there.

Then yesterday I saw this row on uk.net.news.management. The same
fuckwits (tm) again, there, running the uk.* Committee, with nothing
better to do than sit all day on their arses posting nonsense to Usenet.

The same fuckwits I see have now latched on to this sub thread. The
"superior beings" who are anti anything this government does, hate
Brexit, hate Tories, full of their own sense of importance. Thinking
that "so what if a few oldies die, I'm young enough not to be affected
by Covid-19, why should I be locked down"

God knows how 75+ years ago , had Usenet been around like it is today,
one could have got on with these fuckwits criticising everything that
the UK was doing in W.W.II

So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.

Rant over for the moment
--
Bryan Morris
Recliner
2020-05-08 22:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been
reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
What political point was I making? It was an entirely non-political
remark. You're the one who's trying to make it political, and being
thoroughly offensive in the process.
I don't recall ever being impolite to you (not that you're a regular here),
so what's brought this sudden attack on?
I was active on Usenet in the nineties and noughties , largely on
(though not exclusively) uk.*, Demon.*, alt.*, and soc.* newsgroups
which were thriving. Though there were trolls and unnecessary cross
posting things were generally good natured and in fact some ISPs even
suspended users from posting to groups if they proved to be causing
problems.
Those days are long gone.
I sometimes browse some groups (including this one) and found that the
majority of Usenet posters are now the same ones on all. Posting often
just to prove they can, cross posting (WTF has an amateur radio group
got to do with politics) just because they can. I can see why the late
{R} (who I think may have coined the phrase Fuckwit) formed ULM I popped
into uk.legal recently and saw that the trolls, fuckwits, crossposters
were still there.
Then yesterday I saw this row on uk.net.news.management. The same
fuckwits (tm) again, there, running the uk.* Committee, with nothing
better to do than sit all day on their arses posting nonsense to Usenet.
The same fuckwits I see have now latched on to this sub thread. The
"superior beings" who are anti anything this government does, hate
Brexit, hate Tories, full of their own sense of importance. Thinking
that "so what if a few oldies die, I'm young enough not to be affected
by Covid-19, why should I be locked down"
God knows how 75+ years ago , had Usenet been around like it is today,
one could have got on with these fuckwits criticising everything that
the UK was doing in W.W.II
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
You seem to think it's politics to criticise government performance: some
of us feel free to criticise incompetent governments of all flavours. You
seem to think it's OK to be useless as long as they're all Brexiteers. But
you'd be erupting in criticism if it was a Remainer government. Well, I
don't agree. Like most governments, this one has got some things right, and
some wrong, and it's nothing to do with ideology. I don't think Matt
Hancock is a great health secretary, but most of the problems aren't his
fault.

There is no doubt that there's a care home crisis right now, partly because
of a long-term failure to reach a political consensus on how to fund them
properly. It wasn't caused by the current government, and May's attempt to
do something about it was shot down by Labour. Labour didn't fix it either,
and nor did the Coalition.
Bryan Morris
2020-05-09 03:47:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been
reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
What political point was I making? It was an entirely non-political
remark. You're the one who's trying to make it political, and being
thoroughly offensive in the process.
I don't recall ever being impolite to you (not that you're a regular here),
so what's brought this sudden attack on?
I was active on Usenet in the nineties and noughties , largely on
(though not exclusively) uk.*, Demon.*, alt.*, and soc.* newsgroups
which were thriving. Though there were trolls and unnecessary cross
posting things were generally good natured and in fact some ISPs even
suspended users from posting to groups if they proved to be causing
problems.
Those days are long gone.
I sometimes browse some groups (including this one) and found that the
majority of Usenet posters are now the same ones on all. Posting often
just to prove they can, cross posting (WTF has an amateur radio group
got to do with politics) just because they can. I can see why the late
{R} (who I think may have coined the phrase Fuckwit) formed ULM I popped
into uk.legal recently and saw that the trolls, fuckwits, crossposters
were still there.
Then yesterday I saw this row on uk.net.news.management. The same
fuckwits (tm) again, there, running the uk.* Committee, with nothing
better to do than sit all day on their arses posting nonsense to Usenet.
The same fuckwits I see have now latched on to this sub thread. The
"superior beings" who are anti anything this government does, hate
Brexit, hate Tories, full of their own sense of importance. Thinking
that "so what if a few oldies die, I'm young enough not to be affected
by Covid-19, why should I be locked down"
God knows how 75+ years ago , had Usenet been around like it is today,
one could have got on with these fuckwits criticising everything that
the UK was doing in W.W.II
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
You seem to think it's politics to criticise government performance: some
of us feel free to criticise incompetent governments of all flavours. You
seem to think it's OK to be useless as long as they're all Brexiteers. But
you'd be erupting in criticism if it was a Remainer government. Well, I
don't agree. Like most governments, this one has got some things right, and
some wrong, and it's nothing to do with ideology. I don't think Matt
Hancock is a great health secretary, but most of the problems aren't his
fault.
There is no doubt that there's a care home crisis right now, partly because
of a long-term failure to reach a political consensus on how to fund them
properly. It wasn't caused by the current government, and May's attempt to
do something about it was shot down by Labour. Labour didn't fix it either,
and nor did the Coalition.
In the eighties I was, for a time, opposition spokesman on Social
Services in a loony left London Local Authority and used to spend many
weekends making surprise visits to Council owned residential homes
including care homes (and children in care) and then reported back to
the Director of Social Services and have always felt that care workers
are born, not made. There were good, there were bad, homes.

Unlike Hospitals where most (though not all) are run by the NHS.
Residential Care Homes are run by Local Authorities, by private
individuals, by charities, by religious organisations, In my
professional life I even had a client who had this large house which he
decided to turn into a care home - he then moved to Devon and opened
another care home there (his "day job" was as a jazz musician) yes there
were rules and regulations about running homes but nearly anyone can own
a care home.

Almost by definition, care homes contain people who are vulnerable to
diseases. People who often are even unaware of what is going on around
them. Unlike Hospitals, there is no central reporting where causes of
death can be centrally reported.

National Governments can bring in rules and regulations but they don't
control them. There is no "National Care Service"

Care homes are not hospitals, they are not used to have to use PPE, they
and their owners , whoever they may be, are responsible for purchasing
supplies of whatever they need by way of medical equipment.

It is very easy for those who wish to find fault with a government to
blame them for something they, in fact, have no direct control over.
--
Bryan Morris
michael adams
2020-05-09 08:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Care homes are not hospitals, they are not used to have to use PPE, they
and their owners , whoever they may be, are responsible for purchasing
supplies of whatever they need by way of medical equipment.
It is very easy for those who wish to find fault with a government to blame
them for something they, in fact, have no direct control over.
<quote>

Social care has risen as a share of local authority service spending -
excluding education and public health - from 34% in 2009-10 to 41% in 2017-18,
the IFS* found.

</quote>

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/06/councils-spending-less-higher-proportion-budgets-social-care1


<quote>

Alongside central government funding cuts of nearly 50% since 2010-11, local
authorities are facing strong demand and cost pressures, and no reduction in their
statutory obligations to provide services

</quote>

https://www.nao.org.uk/naoblog/local-government-in-2019/ (**)



michael adams

...

* Institute For Fiscal Studies

** National Audit Office
tim...
2020-05-09 11:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Have they taped off any seats, as seems to have happened in foreign
metros? Any police asking if your journey is strictly necessary?
I’m surprised with a good part of the country getting all
nostalgic for an
event that for most was really their parents and grandparents party that
the posters from that era bearing that question haven’t been
reprinted
with figure of a solder replaced by a nurse.
https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/26111
Yes, a very good idea.
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
But of course all you want to do is try to make some cheap political
point.
What political point was I making? It was an entirely non-political
remark. You're the one who's trying to make it political, and being
thoroughly offensive in the process.
I don't recall ever being impolite to you (not that you're a regular here),
so what's brought this sudden attack on?
I was active on Usenet in the nineties and noughties , largely on
(though not exclusively) uk.*, Demon.*, alt.*, and soc.* newsgroups
which were thriving. Though there were trolls and unnecessary cross
posting things were generally good natured and in fact some ISPs even
suspended users from posting to groups if they proved to be causing
problems.
Those days are long gone.
I sometimes browse some groups (including this one) and found that the
majority of Usenet posters are now the same ones on all. Posting often
just to prove they can, cross posting (WTF has an amateur radio group
got to do with politics) just because they can. I can see why the late
{R} (who I think may have coined the phrase Fuckwit) formed ULM I popped
into uk.legal recently and saw that the trolls, fuckwits, crossposters
were still there.
Then yesterday I saw this row on uk.net.news.management. The same
fuckwits (tm) again, there, running the uk.* Committee, with nothing
better to do than sit all day on their arses posting nonsense to Usenet.
The same fuckwits I see have now latched on to this sub thread. The
"superior beings" who are anti anything this government does, hate
Brexit, hate Tories, full of their own sense of importance. Thinking
that "so what if a few oldies die, I'm young enough not to be affected
by Covid-19, why should I be locked down"
God knows how 75+ years ago , had Usenet been around like it is today,
one could have got on with these fuckwits criticising everything that
the UK was doing in W.W.II
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
You seem to think it's politics to criticise government performance: some
of us feel free to criticise incompetent governments of all flavours. You
seem to think it's OK to be useless as long as they're all Brexiteers. But
you'd be erupting in criticism if it was a Remainer government. Well, I
don't agree. Like most governments, this one has got some things right, and
some wrong, and it's nothing to do with ideology. I don't think Matt
Hancock is a great health secretary, but most of the problems aren't his
fault.
There is no doubt that there's a care home crisis right now, partly because
of a long-term failure to reach a political consensus on how to fund them
properly. It wasn't caused by the current government, and May's attempt to
do something about it was shot down by Labour. Labour didn't fix it either,
and nor did the Coalition.
In the eighties I was, for a time, opposition spokesman on Social Services
in a loony left London Local Authority and used to spend many weekends
making surprise visits to Council owned residential homes including care
homes (and children in care) and then reported back to the Director of
Social Services and have always felt that care workers are born, not made.
There were good, there were bad, homes.
Unlike Hospitals where most (though not all) are run by the NHS.
Residential Care Homes are run by Local Authorities, by private
individuals, by charities, by religious organisations, In my
professional life I even had a client who had this large house which he
decided to turn into a care home - he then moved to Devon and opened
another care home there (his "day job" was as a jazz musician) yes there
were rules and regulations about running homes but nearly anyone can own a
care home.
Almost by definition, care homes contain people who are vulnerable to
diseases. People who often are even unaware of what is going on around
them. Unlike Hospitals, there is no central reporting where causes of
death can be centrally reported.
National Governments can bring in rules and regulations but they don't
control them. There is no "National Care Service"
Care homes are not hospitals, they are not used to have to use PPE, they
and their owners , whoever they may be, are responsible for purchasing
supplies of whatever they need by way of medical equipment.
It is very easy for those who wish to find fault with a government to
blame them for something they, in fact, have no direct control over.
but by funding councils to less than what a commercial care home needs to
charge to survive, they have sufficient indirect control over them to be
culpable for the problem

same argument applies to domiciliary care. They fund councils so that they
can pay for time on site and then bring in a minimum wage rule that decrees
that theses workers have to be paid for travelling time (quite rightly
IMHO), and then expect that the councils are going to magic up the money to
pay for that from nowhere

tim
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 08:55:46 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 8 May 2020 20:05:57 +0100
Post by Bryan Morris
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
I think the reason for a lot of it is that politicians have become a lot
like CEOs - they come out with a lot of fancy words with little to back them
up and are quite happy to take the plaudits for when things go right, but
when things go wrong suddenly its all someone elses fault. That gets up a lot
of peoples noses. If you need an example look how Boris & Co were making a
big deal about that PPE from Turkey, yet when it turned out to be faulty (how
the f**k can you screw up making a simple gown?) there were lots of umms and
ahhs and no one taking the blame for not ordering it to be checked before it
left turkey.
Recliner
2020-05-09 09:46:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 20:05:57 +0100
Post by Bryan Morris
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
I think the reason for a lot of it is that politicians have become a lot
like CEOs - they come out with a lot of fancy words with little to back them
up and are quite happy to take the plaudits for when things go right, but
when things go wrong suddenly its all someone elses fault. That gets up a lot
of peoples noses. If you need an example look how Boris & Co were making a
big deal about that PPE from Turkey, yet when it turned out to be faulty (how
the f**k can you screw up making a simple gown?) there were lots of umms and
ahhs and no one taking the blame for not ordering it to be checked before it
left turkey.
Yes, and the testing saga in similar. We clearly were testing far too few
people, not even front-line NHS staff or elderly people turned out of
hospitals into care homes. So Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing
100,000 a day by the end of April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns
out, unachievable, target.

But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.

The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 10:04:11 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 09:46:48 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Yes, and the testing saga in similar. We clearly were testing far too few
people, not even front-line NHS staff or elderly people turned out of
hospitals into care homes. So Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing
100,000 a day by the end of April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns
out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
Unfortunately Boris is proving to be just as useless ineffectual procrastinator
as PM as he was as London mayor. No surprise to me frankly, but he's chosen
an equally useless bunch of yes-men and women as his cabinet which is just
what the UK doesn't need right now. Plus with the lot of them worshipping a
fraud like Ferguson (google how many duff past predictions he's made in the past
on various diseases like Sars that have born little resemblance to reality) and
who clearly doesn't even believe his own advice and we're royally screwed as
none of them have the balls to make the harsh political choices required wrt
restarting the economy.
Recliner
2020-05-09 10:18:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 09:46:48 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Yes, and the testing saga in similar. We clearly were testing far too few
people, not even front-line NHS staff or elderly people turned out of
hospitals into care homes. So Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing
100,000 a day by the end of April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns
out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
Unfortunately Boris is proving to be just as useless ineffectual procrastinator
as PM as he was as London mayor. No surprise to me frankly, but he's chosen
an equally useless bunch of yes-men and women as his cabinet which is just
what the UK doesn't need right now. Plus with the lot of them worshipping a
fraud like Ferguson (google how many duff past predictions he's made in the past
on various diseases like Sars that have born little resemblance to reality) and
who clearly doesn't even believe his own advice and we're royally screwed as
none of them have the balls to make the harsh political choices required wrt
restarting the economy.
Yes, Boris chose a real second-fifteen Cabinet, based on their loyalty to
him, not their competence. And when he was off sick, he chose nonentity
Raab rather than Gove (who is one of the few competent members of the
cabinet) as his stand-in, just to make sure there wasn't a coup.

Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
all. He got lucky with Sunak, who's turned out to be much better than
expected. So Boris will probably want to get rid of him at the first
opportunity, as he doesn't want such strong competition in his team.
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 10:51:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her temperament
and lack of ability.
Recliner
2020-05-09 11:06:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at all.
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her temperament
and lack of ability.
100% agreed.
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 11:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her temperament
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2020-05-09 11:51:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her temperament
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
Yes, that's so true.
Recliner
2020-05-09 11:53:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her temperament
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-control-of-the-cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 15:35:26 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-control-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
He's spot on.

"It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"

I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
Recliner
2020-05-09 15:50:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-control-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
He's spot on.
"It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him.
The main such journo being one Boris Johnson.
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
tim...
2020-05-09 15:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-control-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
He's spot on.
"Itâ?Ts time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
putting the presentation to one side, Parris appears to be arguing that the
policy is wrong

but is there really any mainstream opinion that anything except another
three weeks of lockdown is the only sensible policy here, starting from
where we are?

(I agree that we should have done things differently 8 weeks ago so as not
to be where we are. But we only know that if you have a professor of
hindsight advising you!)

tim
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 16:10:39 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 16:53:25 +0100
Post by tim...
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
He's spot on.
"Itâ?Ts time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
putting the presentation to one side, Parris appears to be arguing that the
policy is wrong
but is there really any mainstream opinion that anything except another
three weeks of lockdown is the only sensible policy here, starting from
where we are?
Sweden. And stricter lockdowns in spain, italy and france have had next to
no impact on infection rate per head of population. Its pretty obvious from
anyone who cares to engage brain that the only thing a lockdown is doing is
sending us into an economic abyss we may not recover from for a decade or
longer and in the meantime there will be a lot of seriously unhappy unemployed
out on the streets once lockdown is lifted.
tim...
2020-05-10 07:34:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 16:53:25 +0100
Post by tim...
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
He's spot on.
"Itâ?Ts time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
putting the presentation to one side, Parris appears to be arguing that the
policy is wrong
but is there really any mainstream opinion that anything except another
three weeks of lockdown is the only sensible policy here, starting from
where we are?
Sweden.
I meant within the UK

are there any voices suggesting that, starting from where we are, there is
any workable alternative to three more weeks (with slight tinkering
perhaps)?
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
And stricter lockdowns in spain, italy and france have had next to
no impact on infection rate per head of population. Its pretty obvious from
anyone who cares to engage brain that the only thing a lockdown is doing is
sending us into an economic abyss we may not recover from for a decade or
longer and in the meantime there will be a lot of seriously unhappy unemployed
out on the streets once lockdown is lifted.
but no-one is saying that

except you

and you're just a nobody (as am I)

tim
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 16:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-control-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
He's spot on.
"It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
r some reason I am seeing your posts in this thread, but not Recliners.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Bryan Morris
2020-05-09 16:36:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-contro
l-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
He's spot on.
"It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
r some reason I am seeing your posts in this thread, but not Recliners.
Did you, like me, once block anything posted from gmail.com after a
spate of drug pusher posts using gmail addresses?
--
Bryan Morris
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 18:04:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-contro
l-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
 He's spot on.
 "It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
 I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as
Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
r some reason I am seeing your posts in this thread, but not Recliners.
Did you, like me, once block anything posted from gmail.com after a
spate of drug pusher posts using gmail addresses?
Nope, I can see his posts on other groups, just not on here.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2020-05-09 19:52:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-contro
l-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
 He's spot on.
 "It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
 I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as
Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
r some reason I am seeing your posts in this thread, but not Recliners.
Did you, like me, once block anything posted from gmail.com after a
spate of drug pusher posts using gmail addresses?
Nope, I can see his posts on other groups, just not on here.
I've not changed how I post, and I don't post via Google Groups.
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 20:47:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 11:53:10 -0000 (UTC)
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 10:18:50 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Some, like Raab and Hancock, are simply over-promoted, but might grow into
the job; others, like Patel and Williamson, shouldn't be in the Cabinet at
Patel shouldn't even be an MP, never mind home secretary with her
temperament
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and lack of ability.
She fulfills the basic requirements for the post, she's no threat to Boris.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-needs-to-take-contro
l-of-the-
cockpit-25t0tw7ck?shareToken=6b18d3fb6b6d01ff91914c0ed6fb792e>
 He's spot on.
 "It’s time to ask whether Boris Johnson is up to the job"
 I think we all know the answer to that. He's not quite as bad as
Theresa May
but he's no Churchill as some more deluded journos liked to portray him. He's
not even a John Major - at least the latter knew his own mind even if most
decisions he made were usually wrong.
r some reason I am seeing your posts in this thread, but not Recliners.
Did you, like me, once block anything posted from gmail.com after a
spate of drug pusher posts using gmail addresses?
Nope, I can see his posts on other groups, just not on here.
I've not changed how I post, and I don't post via Google Groups.
Got that one, I've rebooted the computer so maybe it was a glitch.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2020-05-09 10:29:11 UTC
Permalink
We clearly were testing far too few people, not even front-line NHS
staff or elderly people turned out of hospitals into care homes. So
Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing 100,000 a day by the end of
April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
I don't think many people did believe him. Apart from anything else from
the start - when he took over from Jeremy Hunt - he's been completely
out of his depth.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2020-05-09 10:41:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
We clearly were testing far too few people, not even front-line NHS
staff or elderly people turned out of hospitals into care homes. So
Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing 100,000 a day by the end of
April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
I don't think many people did believe him. Apart from anything else from
the start - when he took over from Jeremy Hunt - he's been completely
out of his depth.
Yes, very much so. And when the media want to interview a Tory politician
who can speak sense on health issues, it's still Hunt they turn to. Hancock
is one of the most obvious examples of over-promotion, though of course
no-one knew at the time how he would later be tested.
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 07:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
We clearly were testing far too few people, not even front-line NHS
staff or elderly people turned out of hospitals into care homes. So
Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing 100,000 a day by the end of
April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
I don't think many people did believe him. Apart from anything else from
the start - when he took over from Jeremy Hunt - he's been completely
out of his depth.
Yes, very much so. And when the media want to interview a Tory politician
who can speak sense on health issues, it's still Hunt they turn to. Hancock
is one of the most obvious examples of over-promotion, though of course
no-one knew at the time how he would later be tested.
Daily Mail reporting today that he's "on borrowed time" as far as his
cabinet colleagues are concerned.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2020-05-10 08:22:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
We clearly were testing far too few people, not even front-line NHS
staff or elderly people turned out of hospitals into care homes. So
Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing 100,000 a day by the end of
April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
I don't think many people did believe him. Apart from anything else from
the start - when he took over from Jeremy Hunt - he's been completely
out of his depth.
Yes, very much so. And when the media want to interview a Tory politician
who can speak sense on health issues, it's still Hunt they turn to. Hancock
is one of the most obvious examples of over-promotion, though of course
no-one knew at the time how he would later be tested.
Daily Mail reporting today that he's "on borrowed time" as far as his
cabinet colleagues are concerned.
Yes, that's been the word for a while. But they'll let him carry the can
during the crisis.
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 08:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
We clearly were testing far too few people, not even front-line NHS
staff or elderly people turned out of hospitals into care homes. So
Matt Hancock rashly promises to be testing 100,000 a day by the end of
April, which was a dreamed-up and, as it turns out, unachievable, target.
But he changed the definition of 'testing' just before the target date, so
he could claim to have met it. But it was a lie: the actual number of
*tests* being conducted by then (which is itself a higher number than the
number of people being tested) was actually about 80,000 per day.
The actual number of *people* being tested per day is around 60-70k. That's
certainly a very big improvement, but he's lost a lot of his already weak
credibility by first dreaming up an impossible target, then missing it,
then lying about supposedly achieving it. Why should anyone believe him the
next time?
I don't think many people did believe him. Apart from anything else from
the start - when he took over from Jeremy Hunt - he's been completely
out of his depth.
Yes, very much so. And when the media want to interview a Tory politician
who can speak sense on health issues, it's still Hunt they turn to. Hancock
is one of the most obvious examples of over-promotion, though of course
no-one knew at the time how he would later be tested.
Daily Mail reporting today that he's "on borrowed time" as far as his
cabinet colleagues are concerned.
Yes, that's been the word for a while. But they'll let him carry the can
during the crisis.
Apparently he's now claiming that Boris forced him to make the claim
about getting 100,000 tests by the end of April.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
michael adams
2020-05-10 09:13:08 UTC
Permalink
Daily Mail reporting today that he's "on borrowed time" as far as his cabinet
colleagues are concerned.
Like it or not, as with Trump, Boris is a sure fire
election winner.

The fact that the more sophisticated among us might not
be able to see the appeal of either of them is neither here nor
there. In fact its precisely why they are so popular.

His colleagues can huff and puff as much as they like but
they're all nonentities as compared with Boris. A loveable
Old Etonian Television Personality with a string of mistresses
behind him who's also economical with the truth - what more
could any political party ask for ?

In fact as with Trump, its difficult to see what Boris
would need to do in order to become unpopular with the public.


michael adams

...
--
Roland Perry
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 09:55:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Daily Mail reporting today that he's "on borrowed time" as far as his cabinet
colleagues are concerned.
Like it or not, as with Trump, Boris is a sure fire
election winner.
The fact that the more sophisticated among us might not
be able to see the appeal of either of them is neither here nor
there. In fact its precisely why they are so popular.
His colleagues can huff and puff as much as they like but
they're all nonentities as compared with Boris. A loveable
Old Etonian Television Personality with a string of mistresses
behind him who's also economical with the truth - what more
could any political party ask for ?
In fact as with Trump, its difficult to see what Boris
would need to do in order to become unpopular with the public.
Well, at the moment both are trying to kill off their electoral base
through incompetence.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
tim...
2020-05-09 11:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 20:05:57 +0100
Post by Bryan Morris
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
I think the reason for a lot of it is that politicians have become a lot
like CEOs - they come out with a lot of fancy words with little to back them
up and are quite happy to take the plaudits for when things go right, but
when things go wrong suddenly its all someone elses fault. That gets up a lot
of peoples noses. If you need an example look how Boris & Co were making a
big deal about that PPE from Turkey, yet when it turned out to be faulty (how
the f**k can you screw up making a simple gown?) there were lots of umms and
ahhs and no one taking the blame for not ordering it to be checked before it
left turkey.
The practicalities of the situation (not being able to travel) caused it not
to be checked before shipping

There doesn't really seem an obvious solution to that

The (soluble) problem was was probably that we didn't make sure that the
supplier understood that he needed to make the product out of the correct
grade of material and had access to same.

FWIW, I suspect that large parts of the world do not have such stringent
requirements here, as the developed world does. Gowns made from (some grade
of) normal clothing fabric are probably considered acceptable (50%
protection is always better than zero). Thus manufactures in these countries
(which encompasses the countries that we go to for cheap quick, throw away,
clothing) probably think that it's perfectly acceptable to make them that
way too.

So that's what they did

Happy for someone to provide evidence (not hyperbole) that I'm wrong

tim
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 15:41:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:59 +0100
Post by tim...
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 20:05:57 +0100
Post by Bryan Morris
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
I think the reason for a lot of it is that politicians have become a lot
like CEOs - they come out with a lot of fancy words with little to back them
up and are quite happy to take the plaudits for when things go right, but
when things go wrong suddenly its all someone elses fault. That gets up a lot
of peoples noses. If you need an example look how Boris & Co were making a
big deal about that PPE from Turkey, yet when it turned out to be faulty (how
the f**k can you screw up making a simple gown?) there were lots of umms and
ahhs and no one taking the blame for not ordering it to be checked before it
left turkey.
The practicalities of the situation (not being able to travel) caused it not
to be checked before shipping
There doesn't really seem an obvious solution to that
The (soluble) problem was was probably that we didn't make sure that the
supplier understood that he needed to make the product out of the correct
grade of material and had access to same.
FWIW, I suspect that large parts of the world do not have such stringent
requirements here, as the developed world does. Gowns made from (some grade
of) normal clothing fabric are probably considered acceptable (50%
protection is always better than zero). Thus manufactures in these countries
(which encompasses the countries that we go to for cheap quick, throw away,
clothing) probably think that it's perfectly acceptable to make them that
way too.
I suspect a lot of NHS workers would prefer to take their chances with these
gowns that have 2nd hand ones or none at all.
tim...
2020-05-09 15:48:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 12:24:59 +0100
Post by tim...
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 20:05:57 +0100
Post by Bryan Morris
So yes, Recliner, I'm pissed off how Usenet has become and political
point scoring about those cruel Tories not supporting care homes.
Rant over for the moment
I think the reason for a lot of it is that politicians have become a lot
like CEOs - they come out with a lot of fancy words with little to back them
up and are quite happy to take the plaudits for when things go right, but
when things go wrong suddenly its all someone elses fault. That gets up
a
lot
of peoples noses. If you need an example look how Boris & Co were making a
big deal about that PPE from Turkey, yet when it turned out to be faulty (how
the f**k can you screw up making a simple gown?) there were lots of umms and
ahhs and no one taking the blame for not ordering it to be checked
before
it
left turkey.
The practicalities of the situation (not being able to travel) caused it not
to be checked before shipping
There doesn't really seem an obvious solution to that
The (soluble) problem was was probably that we didn't make sure that the
supplier understood that he needed to make the product out of the correct
grade of material and had access to same.
FWIW, I suspect that large parts of the world do not have such stringent
requirements here, as the developed world does. Gowns made from (some grade
of) normal clothing fabric are probably considered acceptable (50%
protection is always better than zero). Thus manufactures in these countries
(which encompasses the countries that we go to for cheap quick, throw away,
clothing) probably think that it's perfectly acceptable to make them that
way too.
I suspect a lot of NHS workers would prefer to take their chances with these
gowns that have 2nd hand ones or none at all.
they might

the unions and the local press OTOH ...

tim
Roland Perry
2020-05-08 14:03:55 UTC
Permalink
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the situation.
So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.

No doubt someone can look up how many people are 87+
Who were in some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their
parents have no known graves
Or Brits evacuated *to* villages around England.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2020-05-09 06:55:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
Post by Roland Perry
No doubt someone can look up how many people are 87+
Who were in some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their
parents have no known graves
Or Brits evacuated *to* villages around England.
--
Roland Perry
Bryan Morris
2020-05-09 10:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on
VE day.
I know people in their eighties who recall crying, being scared, when at
seven or eight they first saw their fathers returning from active duty
and wondered who that strange man was.
And a moron on here still says "reflected glory" of that generation and
brings Brexit into the thread.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
No doubt someone can look up how many people are 87+
Who were in some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their
parents have no known graves
Or Brits evacuated *to* villages around England.
--
Bryan Morris
Recliner
2020-05-09 10:25:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on
VE day.
I know people in their eighties who recall crying, being scared, when at
seven or eight they first saw their fathers returning from active duty
and wondered who that strange man was.
And a moron on here still says "reflected glory" of that generation and
brings Brexit into the thread.
*You* were the moron who brought Brexit and politics into this apoltical
thread. But at least you do have the decency to describe yourself as a
moron.
tim...
2020-05-09 11:29:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what it
was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of their
families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations, who
remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the situation.
So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I was 8 when England won the world cup

I can remember watching the game, but cannot recollect why I was in front of
the TV doing this

I can recall no celebrations afterwards

(were there any)

But it stuck in my memory for some reason

make of that what you wish

tim
Marland
2020-05-09 14:23:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what it
was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of their
families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations, who
remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the situation.
So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I was 8 when England won the world cup
I can remember watching the game, but cannot recollect why I was in front of
the TV doing this
I can recall no celebrations afterwards
(were there any)
But it stuck in my memory for some reason
make of that what you wish
tim
I was older at 11 and didn’t have much interest in football but recall the
mascot of the time World Cup Willie ( which sounds like it should be a STD
)everywhere .We hadn’t long moved to the West Country and I got invited
to be part of a group of youngsters who then became the “winning team “
on a Carnival float where I was told I would play the part of Alan Ball.
TBH I wasn’t that enthralled about the experience but it was made tolerable
as the floats and Carnival were assembled in the vicinity of a still
active Halwill Junction though it only had a few more weeks before the Bude
and North Cornwall line to Padstow closed ,the Torrington one had already
gone and the passing trains held my interest more than .
It was soon after then I got to realise that closed when used in reference
to Railways was a permanent thing ,before when I had heard the adults say
the the railway was going to be close I thought it would be like a shop and
open again later.

GH
Marland
2020-05-09 12:05:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I can certainly remember heck of a lot things about my surroundings from
when I was about 7 and the odd thing earlier. What I don’t recall is the
political, social reasons for things being what they were.
Eg I remember trolleybuses in London stopping but wasn’t interested or
recall asking explanation why,
I still have a vivid recollection of being taken in primary school class
to the edge of the Great West Road to see President Eisenhower sweep past,
only in later years did I learn who he was and his place in history .
Things just happen when you are a child and you remember them but don’t get
involved often in the reasons why they happen.

GH
Roland Perry
2020-05-09 12:18:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I can certainly remember heck of a lot things about my surroundings from
when I was about 7 and the odd thing earlier.
I remember everything back to when I was four. But nothing before that.
Perhaps the kerfuffle of moving house at that age acted as a firewall?
Post by Marland
What I don’t recall is the political, social reasons for things being
what they were.
Eg I remember trolleybuses in London stopping but wasn’t interested or
recall asking explanation why,
I still have a vivid recollection of being taken in primary school class
to the edge of the Great West Road to see President Eisenhower sweep past,
only in later years did I learn who he was and his place in history .
Things just happen when you are a child and you remember them but don’t get
involved often in the reasons why they happen.
That didn't seem to apply to the lady on the news last night; perhaps
the unique circumstances of the blitz meant people were more aware of
their surroundings, and why things were happening?
--
Roland Perry
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 14:33:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I can certainly remember heck of a lot things about my surroundings from
when I was about 7 and the odd thing earlier. What I don’t recall is the
political, social reasons for things being what they were.
Eg I remember trolleybuses in London stopping but wasn’t interested or
recall asking explanation why,
I can just remember seeing trams (strictly, a tram) in London, I can't
have been more than 3 years old.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Bryan Morris
2020-05-09 14:54:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
millions of people who were children during WW II would remember what
it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters.
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I can certainly remember heck of a lot things about my surroundings from
when I was about 7 and the odd thing earlier. What I don’t recall is the
political, social reasons for things being what they were.
Eg I remember trolleybuses in London stopping but wasn’t interested or
recall asking explanation why,
I can just remember seeing trams (strictly, a tram) in London, I can't
have been more than 3 years old.
I can beat that. I hazily remembered being in my pram with hills all
around, going down.

Years later I happened to mention it when an aunt was present. She
remembered it.

Apparently we went to Wales when I was maybe a year/ 18 months old, my
aunt was pushing me in a pram in a village in the Welsh valleys. Going
down a hill she was terrified she would lose her grip on the pram or
fall down and it would roll down the hill.

I assume I could sense her fear and I always remembered it.
--
Bryan Morris
Marland
2020-05-09 15:50:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Marland
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
Anyone who was 12 in 1945 would be fully up to speed with the
situation. So that's 87 or older. Many who were younger than that.
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE
day.
I can certainly remember heck of a lot things about my surroundings from
when I was about 7 and the odd thing earlier. What I don’t recall is the
political, social reasons for things being what they were.
Eg I remember trolleybuses in London stopping but wasn’t interested or
recall asking explanation why,
I can just remember seeing trams (strictly, a tram) in London, I can't
have been more than 3 years old.
I do have recollections of certain events when I was around that age and
one which must have occurred when I was even younger, one was when I threw
an Umbrella that Mother had hung on my pushchair into Chiswick High Road
and before she could secure the chair and retrieve it a car stopped
and the woman passenger picked it up and sped away. It must be the
unusualness of such events compared to the more mundane that make them
stick though I do remember a lot about our trips out to Kent and Sussex
undertaken in an Austin 7 when I was small but there are annoying gaps, we
occasionally crossed a railway line with a level crossing with no gates
which seemed unusual and once actually saw a train so I think it must have
been part of Kent and East Sussex before it closed
Rye was a regular destination and we used a floating tea shop in an old
boat, I’d love to find out what it was actually called and when it was
removed. My natural father died soon after I was 6 so a lot of the
information he would have been able to fill in on such things went with
him.

GH
michael adams
2020-05-09 15:32:18 UTC
Permalink
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.

It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.

If you spend a bit of time hanging around outside New Broadcasting House
in June 2031, you may get the chance to be a poster child too.


michael adams

...
Graeme Wall
2020-05-09 16:20:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
michael adams
2020-05-09 16:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
Well Roland for a start; if it gives him the chance of being a poster child
on the TV.

Its pretty obvious he's rather miffed at missing out on VE Day.


michael adams

....
Roland Perry
2020-05-09 19:05:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
Well Roland for a start; if it gives him the chance of being a poster child
on the TV.
Its pretty obvious he's rather miffed at missing out on VE Day.
Where on earth do you get that idea.
--
Roland Perry
michael adams
2020-05-09 21:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
Well Roland for a start; if it gives him the chance of being a poster child
on the TV.
Its pretty obvious he's rather miffed at missing out on VE Day.
Where on earth do you get that idea.
Are you stating categorically that if given the chance of being a
poster child, you would in all circumstances refuse ?


michael adams

...
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 05:42:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
Well Roland for a start; if it gives him the chance of being a poster child
on the TV.
Its pretty obvious he's rather miffed at missing out on VE Day.
Where on earth do you get that idea.
Are you stating categorically that if given the chance of being a
poster child, you would in all circumstances refuse ?
I've been what you might call a bit of a poster chid a few times, but
nothing to do with being miffed at missing VE day.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2020-05-10 10:56:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
I've been what you might call a bit of a poster chid a few times,
Are you sure you haven’t left the word “Wanted” out in front of poster.

GH
Marland
2020-05-09 17:09:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
BBC's poster child on the evening news was a lady who was 8yrs old on VE day.
Don't despair.
It's only another 11 years to the 75th anniversary of Suez.
Who is going to want to commemorate our defeat by the Americans?
Same wazzocks who now celebrate the 4th of July in England.

GH
Marland
2020-05-08 16:02:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
Post by Bryan Morris
Post by Recliner
There can't be many people left who have personal memories of VE-Day. After
the care homes crisis, their number has probably halved in the last couple
of months. Not a great way of celebrating them.
Your normal bollocks
In the UK there are 3.2 million people aged over 80 and 1.6 million aged
over 85
But then what would I expect from you
As I've already said, I was thinking of people who were old enough to know
what VE Day was about. That doesn't include children.
That's what you say now but your main aim of course was to talk about a
"care home crisis" for which , you doubt, you would like to point a
finger at the current government
But millions of people who were children during WW II would remember
what it was all about, who lost fathers and mothers, who had members of
their families in the armed forces, who remember VE day celebrations,
who remember being bombed or spending nights in shelters. Who were in
some cases evacuated from Continental Europe where their parents have no
known graves
Ahh the generation who just because they happened to be around in short
trousers at school at some point between 1939 and 1945 makes them the equal
of blokes in tanks in the desert or drowning in the North Atlantic and have
spent a lifetime since spouting about how “they”won the war in the
reflected glory of efforts genuinely earn’t by their parents and
grandparents , not a few of them anxious to finally have a chance to stick
one over on the Hun themselves voted for Brexit as if the UK was still in a
shooting war with Germany and the EU was all a plot to reverse what
happened in 1945.


Now that’s a political point to keep you occupied for a bit.

GH
michael adams
2020-05-07 14:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.


michael adams

...
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-07 15:30:53 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
michael adams
2020-05-07 17:09:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
But any readers of this group, to whom your observations were
originally addressed, and who might actually find such information
useful, are still completely in the dark.


michael adams

...
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-08 08:22:10 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 7 May 2020 18:09:14 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
But any readers of this group, to whom your observations were
originally addressed, and who might actually find such information
useful, are still completely in the dark.
You seem to think I care about who knows I took the tube. Unlike you I'm not
concerned with the BTP kicking down mhy front door and dragging me off to
the nick for Breaking LockDown Rules (cue juvenile emotional blackmail public
information broadcast full of sad serious looking NHS workers wagging a
metaphorical finger and happy pensioners who've dodged a bullet).

As I've said before, the lockdown is a joke, sweden has now proved it beyond
doubt yet the spineless buffoon in Number 10 seems intent on dragging this
country into an economic abyss in order to save the lives of a few pensioners
who'll soon die of natural causes anyway and some tubbies who only have
themselves to blame for their poor health.
Marland
2020-05-08 08:46:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 18:09:14 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
But any readers of this group, to whom your observations were
originally addressed, and who might actually find such information
useful, are still completely in the dark.
You seem to think I care about who knows I took the tube. Unlike you I'm not
concerned with the BTP kicking down mhy front door and dragging me off to
the nick for Breaking LockDown Rules (cue juvenile emotional blackmail public
information broadcast full of sad serious looking NHS workers wagging a
metaphorical finger and happy pensioners who've dodged a bullet).
A chap up the road did a swoop from here in Hampshire to North Wales and
back in his Austin Healey 3000 to collect something he bought on ebay ,
when asked ( not by me) if he was worried about being stopped and fined
he replied
“ With petrol being so cheap at the moment the saving would have covered
the £30 ticket.”

I doubt he is the only person to have made a similar calculation .

GH
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-08 09:35:34 UTC
Permalink
On 8 May 2020 08:46:33 GMT
Post by Marland
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 18:09:14 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
But any readers of this group, to whom your observations were
originally addressed, and who might actually find such information
useful, are still completely in the dark.
You seem to think I care about who knows I took the tube. Unlike you I'm not
concerned with the BTP kicking down mhy front door and dragging me off to
the nick for Breaking LockDown Rules (cue juvenile emotional blackmail public
information broadcast full of sad serious looking NHS workers wagging a
metaphorical finger and happy pensioners who've dodged a bullet).
A chap up the road did a swoop from here in Hampshire to North Wales and
back in his Austin Healey 3000 to collect something he bought on ebay ,
when asked ( not by me) if he was worried about being stopped and fined
he replied
“ With petrol being so cheap at the moment the saving would have covered
the £30 ticket.”
I doubt he is the only person to have made a similar calculation .
Well we went for a drive to the essex coast last week and the traffic is
much busier now so almost certainly not. Why they're continuing with this
farcical lockdown when its been blatantly ignored for weeks now is anyones guess
michael adams
2020-05-08 18:27:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 18:09:14 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 7 May 2020 15:21:51 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
If you feel like taking a trip up to central london you might be
interested to know the tube is nice and empty and with a lot of closed
stations - quite quick.
The only downside are the childish tannoy messages for everyone to stay
home like good little citizens.
Whatever you do, don't mention at what time of day you
made your journey(s); as that might render such information
useful to someone.
I suspect the ticket gates already have that information.
But any readers of this group, to whom your observations were
originally addressed, and who might actually find such information
useful, are still completely in the dark.
You seem to think I care about who knows I took the tube. Unlike you I'm not
concerned with the BTP kicking down mhy front door and dragging me off to
the nick for Breaking LockDown Rules (cue juvenile emotional blackmail public
information broadcast full of sad serious looking NHS workers wagging a
metaphorical finger and happy pensioners who've dodged a bullet).
As I've said before, the lockdown is a joke, sweden has now proved it beyond
doubt yet the spineless buffoon in Number 10 seems intent on dragging this
country into an economic abyss in order to save the lives of a few pensioners
who'll soon die of natural causes anyway and some tubbies who only have
themselves to blame for their poor health.
That's all very interesting I'm sure. However I was merely pointing out that
whether or not the carriages were nice and empty as they were in your case,
would presumably depend on the time of day your journey was made. So that
without any such information, your otherwise helpful suggestion that others
might care to follow your example, is of very little use I'm afraid.


michael adams

...
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 08:52:31 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 8 May 2020 19:27:00 +0100
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
You seem to think I care about who knows I took the tube. Unlike you I'm not
concerned with the BTP kicking down mhy front door and dragging me off to
the nick for Breaking LockDown Rules (cue juvenile emotional blackmail public
information broadcast full of sad serious looking NHS workers wagging a
metaphorical finger and happy pensioners who've dodged a bullet).
As I've said before, the lockdown is a joke, sweden has now proved it beyond
doubt yet the spineless buffoon in Number 10 seems intent on dragging this
country into an economic abyss in order to save the lives of a few pensioners
who'll soon die of natural causes anyway and some tubbies who only have
themselves to blame for their poor health.
That's all very interesting I'm sure. However I was merely pointing out that
whether or not the carriages were nice and empty as they were in your case,
would presumably depend on the time of day your journey was made. So that
without any such information, your otherwise helpful suggestion that others
might care to follow your example, is of very little use I'm afraid.
I went into town about 12.30 and came back around 2.30. At one point I
literally had an entire piccadilly line train to myself apart from the driver.
It was quite bizarre.
michael adams
2020-05-09 16:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 19:27:00 +0100
Post by michael adams
That's all very interesting I'm sure. However I was merely pointing out that
whether or not the carriages were nice and empty as they were in your case,
would presumably depend on the time of day your journey was made. So that
without any such information, your otherwise helpful suggestion that others
might care to follow your example, is of very little use I'm afraid.
I went into town about 12.30 and came back around 2.30. At one point I
literally had an entire piccadilly line train to myself apart from the driver.
It was quite bizarre.
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.


michael adams

...
b***@nowhere.co.uk
2020-05-09 17:16:01 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 9 May 2020 17:16:40 +0100
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 8 May 2020 19:27:00 +0100
Post by michael adams
That's all very interesting I'm sure. However I was merely pointing out that
whether or not the carriages were nice and empty as they were in your case,
would presumably depend on the time of day your journey was made. So that
without any such information, your otherwise helpful suggestion that others
might care to follow your example, is of very little use I'm afraid.
I went into town about 12.30 and came back around 2.30. At one point I
literally had an entire piccadilly line train to myself apart from the
driver.
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It was quite bizarre.
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.
I was taking pictures of the lockdown plus having an nice walk through the
backstreets of the west end and mayfair.
michael adams
2020-05-09 21:20:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 17:16:40 +0100
Post by michael adams
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.
I was taking pictures of the lockdown plus having an nice walk through the
backstreets of the west end and mayfair.
What *would* be useful at any time, would be the ability to take
pictures of streets, buildings, etc. without the intrusive presence
of parked cars everywhere. Along with too much street furniture, about
which nothing can be done of course. Traffic (and pedestrians) can be
largely avoided by starting at 5.a.m. in summer time; although that
then presents the problem of having all the trees in full leaf.


michael adams

...
Recliner
2020-05-09 21:36:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 17:16:40 +0100
Post by michael adams
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.
I was taking pictures of the lockdown plus having an nice walk through the
backstreets of the west end and mayfair.
What *would* be useful at any time, would be the ability to take
pictures of streets, buildings, etc. without the intrusive presence
of parked cars everywhere. Along with too much street furniture, about
which nothing can be done of course. Traffic (and pedestrians) can be
largely avoided by starting at 5.a.m. in summer time; although that
then presents the problem of having all the trees in full leaf.
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
photos:
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
michael adams
2020-05-09 23:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 17:16:40 +0100
Post by michael adams
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.
I was taking pictures of the lockdown plus having an nice walk through the
backstreets of the west end and mayfair.
What *would* be useful at any time, would be the ability to take
pictures of streets, buildings, etc. without the intrusive presence
of parked cars everywhere. Along with too much street furniture, about
which nothing can be done of course. Traffic (and pedestrians) can be
largely avoided by starting at 5.a.m. in summer time; although that
then presents the problem of having all the trees in full leaf.
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
Thanks.

5.a.m. stillness, but in the middle of the day. And in Central London.

Plus the possibility of encountering Sophie Raworth, or Boltar, coming the other way.

Very eerie.


michael adams

...
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 07:46:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Recliner
Post by michael adams
Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 9 May 2020 17:16:40 +0100
Post by michael adams
Thanks. Although with everything closed, presumably, it would probably
be quite frustrating walking around with nowhere to go except maybe
the odd supermarket. Maybe Sainsburys on TCR or Tesco in Googe St
frinstance.
I was taking pictures of the lockdown plus having an nice walk through the
backstreets of the west end and mayfair.
What *would* be useful at any time, would be the ability to take
pictures of streets, buildings, etc. without the intrusive presence
of parked cars everywhere. Along with too much street furniture, about
which nothing can be done of course. Traffic (and pedestrians) can be
largely avoided by starting at 5.a.m. in summer time; although that
then presents the problem of having all the trees in full leaf.
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
Thanks.
5.a.m. stillness, but in the middle of the day. And in Central London.
Plus the possibility of encountering Sophie Raworth, or Boltar, coming the other way.
Not sure which one scares me more!
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 05:44:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2020-05-10 06:38:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
michael adams
2020-05-10 06:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.

If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.

Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.

That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of reading an
autocue than Sophie Raworth ever could. If only he had the looks.


michael adams

...
tim...
2020-05-10 07:38:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of reading an
autocue
just how hard can it be to read an autocue ;-)

tim
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 07:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way.  During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile
route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job?  She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of reading an
autocue
just how hard can it be to read an autocue ;-)
Seriously, you'd be surprised how many can't. Allegedly one reason why
Trump keeps going off-piste on his speeches.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
tim...
2020-05-10 08:00:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by michael adams
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of reading an
autocue
just how hard can it be to read an autocue ;-)
Seriously,
you do know what smileys are, don't you?
Post by Graeme Wall
you'd be surprised how many can't. Allegedly one reason why Trump keeps
going off-piste on his speeches.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 08:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by tim...
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way.  During the lockdown, she's been varying her six
mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job?  She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of reading an
autocue
just how hard can it be to read an autocue ;-)
Seriously,
you do know what smileys are, don't you?
Yes which is why I put "seriously"
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 08:01:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by michael adams
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job
of reading an autocue
just how hard can it be to read an autocue ;-)
Old joke about schoolgirl have a go reading autocue and doing the sports
news, about the "British Grand Pricks".

"No, that's Grarn Pree" says the director.

"So why did they write 'Grand Pricks' on the autoqueue" says the girl.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 07:45:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
There's simply no pleasing Roland.
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Post by michael adams
Whereas if she jogs to work, then she's clearly got too much time on her hands.
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so what
she does isn't a particularly good role model for the rest of us.
Post by michael adams
That and the fact that Roland could obviously make a far better job of
reading an autocue than Sophie Raworth ever could. If only he had the
looks.
I've not done much autocue work, more likely to be on the other side of
the table, having to extemporise sensible sounding answers in real time.

Most recent was with Simon McCoy on BBC afternoon news. And no, they
didn't pay my travelling expenses (but as it happens I was in the area
already when the call came through).
--
Roland Perry
michael adams
2020-05-10 08:54:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ? Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes. You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,
Post by Roland Perry
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so what she does isn't
a particularly good role model for the rest of us.
According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should take between 2 and 3
hours per day.

Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?

What do you suggest she should be doing instead ? Sat slumped in in
an armchair watching TV ? Posting messages on UseNet ? Spend a part
of her weekly £1.9 k (after tax) on coke or heroin, which she could
well afford obviously, and pass the time that way ?


michael adams

...
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 09:00:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ? Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes.
The job's much more than that, but nice try.
Post by michael adams
You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,
Post by Roland Perry
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so
what she does isn't a particularly good role model for the rest of us.
According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should take between 2 and 3
hours per day.
Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?
It's a lot more than most people exercise, but that's not the point.

Few people can fit that type of commute around their work and home life
schedule, even if they weren't having the change/shower etc.
Post by michael adams
What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which is
going to keep all of them busy.
--
Roland Perry
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 09:54:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ?  Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes.
The job's much more than that, but nice try.
Post by michael adams
You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,
Post by Roland Perry
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so
what she does isn't  a particularly good role model for the rest of us.
According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should  take between 2 and 3
hours per day.
Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?
It's a lot more than most people exercise, but that's not the point.
Few people can fit that type of commute around their work and home life
schedule, even if they weren't having the change/shower etc.
Many people spend (spent!) two to three hours a day commuting.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which is
going to keep all of them busy.
On £200k she can afford a nanny.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 10:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that
would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ?  Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes.
The job's much more than that, but nice try.
Post by michael adams
You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,
Post by Roland Perry
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so
what she does isn't  a particularly good role model for the rest of
According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should  take between 2 and 3
hours per day.
Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?
It's a lot more than most people exercise, but that's not the point.
Few people can fit that type of commute around their work and home
life schedule, even if they weren't having the change/shower etc.
Many people spend (spent!) two to three hours a day commuting.
Not as many as you probably think. See the transport survey I've cited.
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which is
going to keep all of them busy.
On £200k she can afford a nanny.
Which few people can, and part of the reason why her behaviour isn't a
good aspirational model for the rest of society which can't.
--
Roland Perry
Graeme Wall
2020-05-10 11:55:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that
would  clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ? Just for reading an autocue ? It really makes
you think doesn't it ?  Thats' £3.8 k a week. Even after tax that's
still £1.9 k. Every single week. Just for reading an autocue for a
few minutes.
 The job's much more than that, but nice try.
Post by michael adams
You can see why some people are so upset. And its our
Licence Payer's money as well,
Post by Roland Perry
What I'm saying is she's *lucky* to have that time on her hands, so
what she does isn't  a particularly good role model for the rest of
According to your other post, she jogs six miles each way. Which at
a reasonable average speed of 4-6 mph should  take between 2 and 3
hours per day.
Are you seriously suggesting that somebody who spends between 2 and 3
hours per day exercising, is a poor role model ?
 It's a lot more than most people exercise, but that's not the point.
 Few people can fit that type of commute around their work and home
life  schedule, even if they weren't having the change/shower etc.
Many people spend (spent!) two to three hours a day commuting.
Not as many as you probably think. See the transport survey I've cited.
Probably just as many as I think.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
 She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which is
going to keep all of them busy.
On £200k she can afford a nanny.
Which few people can, and part of the reason why her behaviour isn't a
good aspirational model for the rest of society which can't.
Tall poppy syndrome.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 12:16:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Graeme Wall
Many people spend (spent!) two to three hours a day commuting.
Not as many as you probably think. See the transport survey I've cited.
Probably just as many as I think.
What's the percentage you have in mind?
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by michael adams
What do you suggest she should be doing instead ?
 She has a husband and three youngish children for starters, which
is going to keep all of them busy.
On £200k she can afford a nanny.
Which few people can, and part of the reason why her behaviour isn't
a good aspirational model for the rest of society which can't.
Tall poppy syndrome.
It's nothing to do with disparaging what she's achieved, just the
practical situation that employing a nanny is likely to cost more than
the average wage-earner's disposable income. I employed nannies for
about eight years, so I know a bit about the logistics.

Including that not many of them will want to stay up until an hour and
half after someone has finished reading the Ten O'clock news.
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2020-05-10 12:15:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by michael adams
Post by Roland Perry
Post by michael adams
If she went to work in a taxi, paid for by the BBC, then that would clearly
be a complete waste of licence payers, i.e. our money.
Compared to her £200k salary, it's peanuts.
Is it really £200K ?
BBC Salaries 2019:

"Sophie Raworth - £265,000-£269,999"

HTH

tim
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 07:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
Only a few days a week. And she doesn't do the Ten O'clock every time
she's on the Six O'clock.

Not many people have a home within six miles of Oxford Circus, or can
afford the time to jog back and forth six miles anywhere. And of course
she'll have a dressing room to change from the jogging outfit into her
work clothes. I have no interest in dissecting her childcare
arrangements, but whether paid for, or having a part-time employed
husband, it's another consideration[1], noting how important in
transport survey the school-run is, chart22 here:

<https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa
ds/attachment_data/file/823068/national-travel-survey-2018.pdf>

It's nice work if you can get it, but hardly a role model for the vast
majority of the working public.

[1] FAOD, I've been that part-time employed husband, or organiser of a
nanny, in our household, freeing up my wife to work unsocial hours.
When she was doing an evening radio show, broadcast from studios
near Carnaby St, it was a bit of a long way to jog from Surbiton, so
she took the train. Of course the unsocial hours can be the other
end of the day, with researchers calling at 7am and wanting
broadcastable comments soon after.
--
Roland Perry
tim...
2020-05-10 07:41:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
Only a few days a week. And she doesn't do the Ten O'clock every time
she's on the Six O'clock.
Not many people have a home within six miles of Oxford Circus, or can
afford the time to jog back and forth six miles anywhere. And of course
she'll have a dressing room to change
don't all TV presenters have facilities to get washed, changed, made up
before they go on air

regardless of how they have arrived at the studio?

Isn't it just part of the job?
Roland Perry
2020-05-10 08:02:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by tim...
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Sophie Raworth, the newsreader, is a keen runner, and often
commutes to the
BBC that way. During the lockdown, she's been varying her six
mile route
to pass through unusually empty areas at lunchtime, and has been taking
<https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-52155029>
It's nice when you've got a well-paid part-time job and have the luxury
of being able to do that kind of thing.
Part-time job? She arrives at lunchtime and does the Six and Ten.
Only a few days a week. And she doesn't do the Ten O'clock every time
she's on the Six O'clock.
Not many people have a home within six miles of Oxford Circus, or can
afford the time to jog back and forth six miles anywhere. And of course
she'll have a dressing room to change
don't all TV presenters have facilities to get washed, changed, made up
before they go on air
regardless of how they have arrived at the studio?
Isn't it just part of the job?
Yes, and he fact almost nobody else does, means how unsuitable her daily
schedule is as a role model for the rest of us.
--
Roland Perry
Loading...