The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[aaron1867]

...and latest polls still good for Boris!....probably add a 1% for Amber going 

It’s a mad world atm

Those polls, eh?

Predicted trump losing, remain winning & Tories getting a huge majority.

How’d that go?

Clue: not very well

You replied to this but not mine?   Nothing personal surely? 

My 7 year old nephews keep nagging me and asking the same questions, I don’t reply to them either.

why do you reply to the questions that are easy and suit you?   does yourr 7 year old only ask questions that don't suit you?

Do you have a dog? Then you’ll know how I feel when someone is so desperate for a reaction.

Good night Arb x

[Doobs]

It will be another one he walks away from pops, we all know it.

I’ve never walked away from discussing the issues raised in this thread. As I’ve said before, the only reason why I’m here is because I believe there’s merit in discussing these things.

This isn’t a bad analysis, for sure it’s highly possible/likely that not all 120,000 are attributed directly to what the government, lots of them are though.

https://fullfact.org/health/austerity-120000-unnecessary-deaths/

Apologies to Rick for the approach I took in that sequence of posts.

Sometimes, I am sure you just find a nice juicy headline and don't read the article at all.

Extracts from this document that"proves your point"

 Restrictions on health and social care spending is one of a number of possible explanations for this, and the findings need to be treated with a bit of caution.


 “There was a report this week, we are getting 120,000 unnecessary deaths every year in this country as a direct result of the austerity.”

Val McDermid, 16 November 2017 (isn't Val a fiction writer???)


While lower growth in health and social care spending since 2010 may be behind the increase in deaths, these findings should be treated with caution as the research doesn’t prove this is the case. Reduced spending is one of a number of possible explanations for the results.


Older people accounted for more of these additional deaths, with deaths at care homes and at home contributing most to the estimated additional deaths. Deaths in hospital were lower than expected. The authors put this down to greater pressures on social care spending, but also a drive to move more patients reaching the end of possible health treatments out of hospital.
Lets think about this one a bit. Deaths were actually LOWER in hospitals. People sent off to care home, where they are looked after by Care Assistants, not Nurses. Hmm, what do we think the outcome is likely to be?


I struggle to see your headline 120,000 additional deaths due to austerity being in any way substantiated by this article..even the article questions its own numbers!

NEXT!

It goes without saying that I don’t think you understand. I am happy to try and do a better job of explaining if you’d like?

Carry on Rover, so far you haven't convinced anyone.

Oh, please keep up with the condescending put downs, it highlights your nice guy attributes.

So while I have been golfing today, more insults chucked, but as expected, still no reply to prove your point. You are right, it is insulting to be compared to you and your poor attempts at building yourself up, with F all to back it up, unless you have read it somewhere.

That study is out of date and we no longer need to use projections.  

There has been a marked fall in mortality improvements over the last 5 years, and the 40 year trend in mortality improvements may well have gone as far as reversing.  You can't know the real trend for sure because of variance; for instance a harsh winter can cause a spike in deaths etc.

I think it is a safe assumption to state that austerity has caused some of these excess deaths, but it certainly isn't all of them.  There has been excess deaths from flu in, from memory, 3 of the last 5 years, which was put down to a fairly ineffective flu vaccine for those years, and this has certainly caused some of the excess deaths.  You can see that austerity is a good candidate for a significant number of these deaths, by looking in more detail at the split of mortality improvements.  Those at the lower end of the social scale have suffered much more from the change in the trend in mortality improvements with those in higher social classes happily bowling along and experiencing improved mortality rates as if austerity never happened (the Jacob Rees Mogg, Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and Nigel Farage types have less reason to give a shit about the downside*).  

So I think it is safe to say that austerity has caused a significant number of excess deaths, but it isn't safe to say it caused 120,000 (or 90,000 or 75,000 or whatever today's number of the day is).

* As an aside a life insurer has to be careful reflecting the change in trend, as richer people tend to have bigger insurances, so their mortality is way more important to an insurer than the increased mortality suffered by the poor downtrodden Brexit party voters.

[arbboy]

...and latest polls still good for Boris!....probably add a 1% for Amber going  

It’s a mad world atm

Those polls, eh?

Predicted trump losing, remain winning & Tories getting a huge majority.

How’d that go?

Clue: not very well

You replied to this but not mine?   Nothing personal surely?  

My 7 year old nephews keep nagging me and asking the same questions, I don’t reply to them either.

why do you reply to the questions that are easy and suit you?   does yourr 7 year old only ask questions that don't suit you?

Do you have a dog? Then you’ll know how I feel when someone is so desperate for a reaction.

Good night Arb x

i don't have a dog but i bet on dogs for a living.    I am not looking for any reaction just an honest answer to my question.   Your ego seems very keen to answer questions or put your opinions forward when it suits you but to other shall we say more shrewd operators who ask you tougher questions you don't seem quite as keen to answer.   Maybe the fractional question Trev posed was based around you rather than me.   Trev is a very shrewd judge and knows what he is talking about.   Maybe you don't understand the fraction and what it means like i do.   I know you are a ticket tout so i assumed you got maths and fractions.   Maybe you don't.  I know how changing the subject or walking away like a coward is though when you are out of your depth and been fully exposed.   is that why you said good night?

[Doobs]

BREAKING: Amber Rudd the cabinet minister has resigned the Conservative whip and plans to run as an independent Conservative at the general election. See the Sunday Times

Says he is not serious about getting a deal and she asked to see the strategy, which was not forthcoming.

what GE ?  has the date been announced?   If not what an arrogant statement.

Sorry, I don't get it Lolboy.

Given that there is going to be a general election within the next 3 years, whatever happens, then how is the statement arrogant?  

She is just stating what her intentions are at the next election, as have many of the other "rebel" conservatives.


 

She is assuming there will be an election in the next 2 months with that statement.  There might not be.   What has changed for her to suddenly resign now rather than weeks/months ago?  She knew the drill when BJ took over so why suddenly resign now?   Nothing much has changed in the betting markets long term.

Maybe she has been suffering with the big decision she had to make; tunrning your back on the cabinet salary and the Conservative party can't be easy in her shoes, and maybe she has a much better understanding of what is going on on the inside than you or I and the betting markets? 

From what I read and the bit that was posted here, I don't think she is assuming an election in the next two months.  But even if she did think there was an election in the next two months, how would that make her arrogant?  Dare say a few here expect an election in the next two months and only around half of those people are arrogant... 

[arbboy]

BREAKING: Amber Rudd the cabinet minister has resigned the Conservative whip and plans to run as an independent Conservative at the general election. See the Sunday Times

Says he is not serious about getting a deal and she asked to see the strategy, which was not forthcoming.

what GE ?  has the date been announced?   If not what an arrogant statement.

Sorry, I don't get it Lolboy.

Given that there is going to be a general election within the next 3 years, whatever happens, then how is the statement arrogant?  

She is just stating what her intentions are at the next election, as have many of the other "rebel" conservatives.


 

She is assuming there will be an election in the next 2 months with that statement.  There might not be.   What has changed for her to suddenly resign now rather than weeks/months ago?  She knew the drill when BJ took over so why suddenly resign now?   Nothing much has changed in the betting markets long term.

Maybe she has been suffering with the big decision she had to make; tunrning your back on the cabinet salary and the Conservative party can't be easy in her shoes, and maybe she has a much better understanding of what is going on on the inside than you or I and the betting markets? 

From what I read and the bit that was posted here, I don't think she is assuming an election in the next two months.  But even if she did think there was an election in the next two months, how would that make her arrogant?  Dare say a few here expect an election in the next two months and only around half of those people are arrogant... 

I doubt she cares about the salary in the slightest.  She doesn't need the money.   She probably does have a better understanding than us but she probably knew thiis weeks ago.  I doubt much has changed with boris in the last few weeks.   If she didn't assume that then maybe she should view betfair more often.   You are the biggest fan of it never being wrong.

[Doobs]

BREAKING: Amber Rudd the cabinet minister has resigned the Conservative whip and plans to run as an independent Conservative at the general election. See the Sunday Times

Says he is not serious about getting a deal and she asked to see the strategy, which was not forthcoming.

what GE ?  has the date been announced?   If not what an arrogant statement.

Sorry, I don't get it Lolboy.

Given that there is going to be a general election within the next 3 years, whatever happens, then how is the statement arrogant?  

She is just stating what her intentions are at the next election, as have many of the other "rebel" conservatives.


 

She is assuming there will be an election in the next 2 months with that statement.  There might not be.   What has changed for her to suddenly resign now rather than weeks/months ago?  She knew the drill when BJ took over so why suddenly resign now?   Nothing much has changed in the betting markets long term.

Maybe she has been suffering with the big decision she had to make; tunrning your back on the cabinet salary and the Conservative party can't be easy in her shoes, and maybe she has a much better understanding of what is going on on the inside than you or I and the betting markets? 

From what I read and the bit that was posted here, I don't think she is assuming an election in the next two months.  But even if she did think there was an election in the next two months, how would that make her arrogant?  Dare say a few here expect an election in the next two months and only around half of those people are arrogant... 

I doubt she cares about the salary in the slightest.  She doesn't need the money.   She probably does have a better understanding than us but she probably knew thiis weeks ago.  I doubt much has changed with boris in the last few weeks.   If she didn't assume that then maybe she should view betfair more often.   You are the biggest fan of it never being wrong.

For starters, I don't think 2 months ago she was expecting Philip Hammond, Nicholas Soames and 19 others to be thrown out of the Conservatives.  I am not sure she was expecting Dominic Cummings to be running number 10 either.  I am not sure that anybody really expected that cabinet ministers and the PM would be discussing breaking the law.  Significant changes have been happening almost daily over the last couple of weeks.

Comedy last line, no truth in it at all, but wp. 

Good night

 

[BigAdz]

It will be another one he walks away from pops, we all know it.

I’ve never walked away from discussing the issues raised in this thread. As I’ve said before, the only reason why I’m here is because I believe there’s merit in discussing these things.

This isn’t a bad analysis, for sure it’s highly possible/likely that not all 120,000 are attributed directly to what the government, lots of them are though.

https://fullfact.org/health/austerity-120000-unnecessary-deaths/

Apologies to Rick for the approach I took in that sequence of posts.

Sometimes, I am sure you just find a nice juicy headline and don't read the article at all.

Extracts from this document that"proves your point"

 Restrictions on health and social care spending is one of a number of possible explanations for this, and the findings need to be treated with a bit of caution.


 “There was a report this week, we are getting 120,000 unnecessary deaths every year in this country as a direct result of the austerity.”

Val McDermid, 16 November 2017 (isn't Val a fiction writer???)


While lower growth in health and social care spending since 2010 may be behind the increase in deaths, these findings should be treated with caution as the research doesn’t prove this is the case. Reduced spending is one of a number of possible explanations for the results.


Older people accounted for more of these additional deaths, with deaths at care homes and at home contributing most to the estimated additional deaths. Deaths in hospital were lower than expected. The authors put this down to greater pressures on social care spending, but also a drive to move more patients reaching the end of possible health treatments out of hospital.
Lets think about this one a bit. Deaths were actually LOWER in hospitals. People sent off to care home, where they are looked after by Care Assistants, not Nurses. Hmm, what do we think the outcome is likely to be?


I struggle to see your headline 120,000 additional deaths due to austerity being in any way substantiated by this article..even the article questions its own numbers!

NEXT!

It goes without saying that I don’t think you understand. I am happy to try and do a better job of explaining if you’d like?

Carry on Rover, so far you haven't convinced anyone.

Oh, please keep up with the condescending put downs, it highlights your nice guy attributes.

So while I have been golfing today, more insults chucked, but as expected, still no reply to prove your point. You are right, it is insulting to be compared to you and your poor attempts at building yourself up, with F all to back it up, unless you have read it somewhere.

That study is out of date and we no longer need to use projections.  

There has been a marked fall in mortality improvements over the last 5 years, and the 40 year trend in mortality improvements may well have gone as far as reversing.  You can't know the real trend for sure because of variance; for instance a harsh winter can cause a spike in deaths etc.

I think it is a safe assumption to state that austerity has caused some of these excess deaths, but it certainly isn't all of them.  There has been excess deaths from flu in, from memory, 3 of the last 5 years, which was put down to a fairly ineffective flu vaccine for those years, and this has certainly caused some of the excess deaths.  You can see that austerity is a good candidate for a significant number of these deaths, by looking in more detail at the split of mortality improvements.  Those at the lower end of the social scale have suffered much more from the change in the trend in mortality improvements with those in higher social classes happily bowling along and experiencing improved mortality rates as if austerity never happened (the Jacob Rees Mogg, Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and Nigel Farage types have less reason to give a shit about the downside*).  

So I think it is safe to say that austerity has caused a significant number of excess deaths, but it isn't safe to say it caused 120,000 (or 90,000 or 75,000 or whatever today's number of the day is).

* As an aside a life insurer has to be careful reflecting the change in trend, as richer people tend to have bigger insurances, so their mortality is way more important to an insurer than the increased mortality suffered by the poor downtrodden Brexit party voters.

No doubt Kush will lay claim to this, so thanks for spoiling my fun Doobs.

He will then say it was so obvious, that's why he never bothered to reply to such a simpleton.

We know the truth though.

[MANTIS01]

You didn’t say good night Adz

Good night everyone

[4KSuited]

Morning all

(In before Red  )

[arbboy]

Morning all before I go to bed .   Mrs Bandit is checking in.   Incredible scenes.

[arbboy]

Say high mrs bandit been a long time since blonde had your company.   Don't be shy

[sonour]

Evening all. I’m on Blonde same time every night. Must be I just haven’t been logged in for some reason.
xx

[engy]

evening all why didn't the cleverest of them all Adz say goodnight im sad

[BigAdz]

evening all why didn't the cleverest of them all Adz say goodnight im sad

I haven't gone to bed yet.

Deforestation not the cleverest, but not as dumb as Kuku tries to imply.

Goodnight all.

[RED-DOG]

Morning all

(In before Red  )

Morning K4.

It only counts if you've been to bed and been to sleep.