Lord Duckhunter

God, it’s like trying to explain offside to my snap dragon. It’s not a question of lockdown, or no lockdown, but of getting the balance between sensible measures and harming the economy. The problem with lockdown enthusiasts is their answer to everything is more lockdown. If lockdown doesn’t work and the infection rates go up , let’s lockdown harder. It’s a circle that can never be broken. If you’re measuring everything by Covid infection rates alone, then only severe lockdowns will “work”. If you’re judging it by future prosperity, other health outcomes, mental health issues, as well as Covid rates, then taking sensible precautions whilst shielding the most at risk makes more sense.

Theres loads of lockdown rules that don’t make a blind bit of difference to infection rates, but make a hell of a difference to the economy. I’d also have thought Doctors surgeries working normally would also be quite a good idea.

I wouldn’t worry about it. They’re just tying themselves in knots to justify being against the deal, yet voting for it.

It’s open, but apart from that , good point well made.

Not at all. Merely pointing out that it wasn’t a “stonewall”. Had it been, one of the referee or VAR would have given it, every poster on here would have said it, & Alan Shearer would also have said it. It was open to debate, and that’s what people are having. I was disappointed it wasn’t given, but equally would have been annoyed if we’d conceded one like that.

Again, who is saying “crack on as normal”?

Do you accept that lockdown will cause more unemployment & poverty. Do you accept that it will affect some people’s mental health & do you accept that there will be poorer health outcomes in relation to other diseases. I don’t normally quote the Guardian, but this is what they wrote; “The number of people entering treatment for cancer has dropped significantly, meaning many patients who would have ordinarily been tested for cancer were not seen. In April 2019 almost 200,000 people were referred to a consultant for suspected cancer by their GPs. This April that figure fell to just 79,573”. So the question shouldn’t be “what other measures will lead to lower infections, without lockdown”. But is the lockdown proportionate, in terms of years saved & cost to the economy.

I’ve not seen anyone advocating letting it run wild, only lockdown enthusiasts claiming it’s what other people want. It’s not just lockdown or nothing, there’s lots of measures in between.

And Alan Shearer wouldn’t have said it wasn’t on MoTD.

The NHS isn’t able to do its job BECAUSE of the lockdown. You can’t get a Doctors appointment for love or money, a guy who works for me has had 2 operations cancelled as a direct result of lockdown, and I’m sure there’s countless others in the same boat. Harsh as it sounds there are 2 sides to the ledger. One side contains the people saved (mainly older folk) from lockdown & the other side contains people who die as a result of lockdown. People with mental health issues as a result of losing their job, or poverty. People whose cancer was diagnosed later than it normally would be, people who are scared to visit A&E and as a result die of heart attack or stroke. A midwife told me that women turning up for scans worried the baby has stopped moving is down 90% since lockdown, as they’re too scared of visiting hospital and catching Covid. Most are fine, but some saved their unborn babies life by acting quickly. Therefore it stands to reason that fear of checking out your baby will cause some deaths. This is horrible stuff, but stuff used to make health decisions year in year out. Lockdown may save people from dying of Covid, but it will cause preventable deaths elsewhere.

Thought I’d watch match of the day this morning as you sometimes get a different perspective watching twice. However, it was unwatchable and I had to mute it after a couple of minutes. Anyone who thinks that bird is a competent commentator is plain wrong. Horrendous.

You really think they’d give us more favourable terms than countries that haven’t left. A rules based organisation, would bend their rules for a country that had left it once before. You’re deluded.

If you think the British public will want the following, you’re more out of touch than even I thought you were. To rejoin we’ll have to; Accept the euro Be part of Schegen Pay in without our previous rebate. That’s before the discussion of sovereignty, ever closer Union, CFP & CAP has even started. We’ll also be years of integration further down the line, more federal, more of what the brits don’t want. Then there’s the new members in those years, good luck selling FoM from Albania or Serbia. The British people voted out despite our special arms length relationship, they’re not going to vote to rejoin as fully fledged members with all its bells and whistles . People like Grievance, Soubry & Bercow understood this, even if you don’t. That’s why they fought so hard to overturn the vote.

Pony. It won’t make a blind bit of difference to “ease of travel”.

Pony. What happened was people moaned about handballs being given as penalties, so they’ve now changed the definition. Surprise surprise, people are moaning about them not being given. I absolutely guarantee had that been given against us the majority of posters on here would be moaning.

Got to love the way Remoaners “hard Brexit” keeps changing . Once it meant leaving the SM & CU, now it means WTO. There never was hard or soft Brexit, there was just Brexit & a future relationship negotiated by the PM and then voted through by Parliament. I’d imagine this future relationship pleases most leave voters, but if not, we’ll punish Boris at the polls, and there’s only one direction any change to the relationship is heading. If you think the British people will vote to rejoin you’re deluded. Rejoining means accepting the Euro, becoming part of Schegen and paying in without the great lady’s rebate. It’s not going to happen. It’s over, but I do understand you and others desire to somehow paint this as a betrayal that leavers don’t understand. It can’t be easy to come to terms with being so comprehensively out of touch with the great unwashed and as you’ve spent 4 years calling them thick , racists and generally being condescending, there’s really no reason to stop now.

But they’re not servicing the rest of the NHS.

Fucking whinging again, what’s the matter with people? If he’d had Redmond or Ings on the bench, he’d have brought them on sooner, but the quality ain’t there. We have a decent starting 11 but, a pretty average squad. The manager is producing a bloody miracle with that bunch, yet people are still criticising him. FFS, any point away from home is ok in this league and if Fulham are as shiete as some make out, how did the manage a draw with Liverpool the other day.

Lol. More clutching at straws.

You’re right. This will be their next whinge, despite the fact there’s never been a fully formed single market in services. Clutching at straws. They’re so desperate for something to go wrong, but the reality is that the vast vast majority of the country will be happy with the outcome.

Tariffs are a tax on consumers, as goods will cost consumers more. Is it not a good thing that Audis, BMW’s & Volkswagen’s will remain tariff free for British consumers?

Firstly, there’s not really a single market in services, there’s still barriers to trade. Even the Irish are pushing for these to be broken down and the great lady thought this the area her Single market failed to cover. But secondly, both sides have agreed to continue to negotiate in this area, with the EU granting temporary equivalence rights until it’s sorted. Not that anything will stop your sniping and moaning. Most remainers will be grateful a deals been done, and those that aren’t can campaign to rejoin. Good luck with that, but first you’ll need to find your Nigel.

The Editor of Bild, Europe’s largest selling newspaper confirms what Brexiters claimed all along, that German economic interests would ensure a deal. He claims Barnier was trying to goad us Brits to walk away, believing we’d come back in 6 moths tail between our legs. That he was sidelined because Berlin believed this would cause an economic disaster in The EU, specifically mentioning German car makers. He claims that Merkel worked behind the scenes with Frau von der Leyen, before finally praising the deal thus; “Your Prime Minister has achieved a deal which is nothing short of sensational: What Mr Johnson has achieved is a tailor-made agreement that allows full access to your most important market while being able to write your own laws and standards – as long as you play fair, which is something British traders have been renowned for doing for centuries.” All negotiated in 12 months. Looks like it was a pretty easy deal to get done after all. And Boris does get to have his cake & eat it.

Brilliant, so it’s been delivered then. Perhaps had we left earlier, we’d have got the money earlier. But never mind, as you say, the NHS will be getting that amount. The message on the bus didn’t mention timescales. But fair play to you, unlike other remainers you’ve accepted it’s going to be delivered.

This is NY Times. Both sides had agreed during the negotiations to discuss financial services separately. The U.K. government said in a document published Thursday that the agreement includes provisions to support trade in services, including financial services and legal services. “This will provide many U.K. service suppliers with legal guarantees that they will not face barriers to trade when selling into the EU and will support the mobility of U.K. professionals who will continue to do business across the EU,” according to the document. The agreement includes what the U.K. government described as “groundbreaking provisions” on legal services which allow U.K. lawyers to advise clients across the EU on U.K. and public international law, except where EU members place specific limits on this. From Jan. 1, U.K.-based financial institutions lose automatic access to the EU’s single market. To serve customers in the EU next year, U.K.-based institutions will have to be granted equivalence rights, under which the EU allows them to conduct certain financial activities. Equivalence rights can be withdrawn at short notice. So far the EU has granted temporary equivalence rights to British clearinghouses, which operate between buyers and sellers in trades and pledge to complete the deal even if one side reneges. London has much of this financial plumbing, which manages trillions of dollars of derivatives contracts every day. The sides will continue discussing how to move forward on granting equivalence and pledged to codify a framework for regulatory cooperation.