2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 30, 2020 8:46:17 GMT
I nearly put the heating on earlier! I did put the heating on! My Dad would be turning in his grave, heating on before October??!!?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 28, 2020 19:53:20 GMT
Proms 2020 - First Night has just started And a felt a little tear in my eye - to see the joy on the face of the conductor as he started the concert. My eroica
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 27, 2020 8:40:08 GMT
the historical truth is that they are not accurate which is why Labour wanted to do away with them for University entrance in their last manifesto. Several teachers I know say that teacher assessed grades are likely to be higher than those achieved. I am frankly getting fed up of the fuss made of this issue. What did everyone think would happen with a year when no exams were sit? It was never going to be a straight forward situation to resolve and the fact that the final grades awarded were the highest in 13 years in the top grades show that students were probably given higher grades than would have been achieved by exams. I do sympathise with those who were doing resits and so had no teacher to assess their grade but for the vast majority they have come out with better than they would have got. This was born out by the jubilant scenes when the GCSE results were published. Exam results should be slightly higher this year though. That is correct no?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 24, 2020 7:50:00 GMT
Whilst I won't be venturing to a theatre for a while, due to issues with public transport, it's great to see the Bad Behaviour thread back again! This
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 18, 2020 10:21:55 GMT
I've a friend teaches A-levels in a school in Liverpool. Twenty five pupils in his class and of the twenty five grades he predicted twenty were marked down. Of the eighty percent marked down, fifteen were by one grade and five marked down by two grades. Also shown me a little history of grade prediction success rate which is solid. Sorry Matthew you are going to get annoyed with me. I think this has a couple of simple solutions, but the fairest is teacher grades. The government have made another monumental cock up which has led to the obvious u-turn. Really not very good at government this crew That's just a single data point. Any proposal has to be applied equally to every school, and no matter what scheme is used there are going to be some pupils whose evaluation is close the the result they'd have had in the exams and some that won't be close and no possible government would be able to come up with a proposal that got it right for everyone. It's trivially easy to come up with a solution that works well for a small subset of cases. Coming up with a solution that works for nearly every case is far harder, especially when the sheer scale of the task means you can't individually evaluate every situation in person. Teacher grades may work in some cases but not all teachers are equally competent, some are under pressure to make their schools "look good", some hold grudges against difficult pupils, some are racist, some are sexist, some have entirely arbitrary prejudices. Do you really want someone's results to be based on the evaluation of a person who thinks, for example, "girls can't do science"? It's not as if this is an unlikely scenario. Eliminating biases and creating a level playing field is one of the reasons we have exams in the first place. Also, I think it's important to remember that "the government" is not just whoever's in Downing Street and their mates. There are hundreds of thousands of people involved and all those people have been educated like everyone else and interviewed for their jobs like everyone else and trained for their positions like everyone else. The cabinet makes many of the final decisions but those decisions are based on the work of people who stay the same from election to election and don't suddenly turn into incompetent simpletons just because the current resident of Number 10 is an oaf. I didn't say it was perfect, I said fairest and best way. We was always going to end at this solution. Why did the government put the poor students through the last week or so? Conservative MP's calling for the Education Minister to go today. Yeah, I think he has messed this up pretty badly for that to happen
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 17:05:16 GMT
Can we stop thinking of the exams situation as being about a Conservative government please? Education is a devolved power and so Scotland (run by the SNP), Wales (run by Labour), NI (run by SF/DUP) have all had to drop the moderated grades as produced by their independent exam bodies. This is not about party politics - as it is politicians of all colours who have overseen this. Teacher predicted grades - www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49330720 - the historical truth is that they are not accurate which is why Labour wanted to do away with them for University entrance in their last manifesto. Many things have gone wrong - but you cannot pin the blame on Boris or Williamson and then ignore the failures in Belfast, Edinburgh and Cardiff as if they didn't happen. Would Gavin Williamson have apologised if he didn't arse this up?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 17:04:27 GMT
My teacher predicted I'd get a C in Economics. I only went and got an A, didn't I...not because I worked especially hard, or spent every waking hour revising, but because I'm an economics genius. 🙂 I even finished the exam paper with about an hour to spare! Went the other way in Maths, mind, so I suppose it all balanced out. Correct, students do get higher than my friends predictions. And some get lower. Total statistical prediction is what is solid
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 16:08:34 GMT
I've a friend teaches A-levels in a school in Liverpool. Twenty five pupils in his class and of the twenty five grades he predicted twenty were marked down. Of the eighty percent marked down, fifteen were by one grade and five marked down by two grades. Also shown me a little history of grade prediction success rate which is solid. Sorry Matthew you are going to get annoyed with me. I think this has a couple of simple solutions, but the fairest is teacher grades. The government have made another monumental cock up which has led to the obvious u-turn. Really not very good at government this crew
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 11:43:54 GMT
Come on mate, that post is terrible. Government playing their now time honoured trick. Let's see how sh*te we can be. Nasty party, a very nasty party. It's ironic that certain political parties can be bashed on here but when anything is said about any other demographic everyone is up in arms. There is no easy solution to this and to whilst to compare a school's average grades other a number of years it may make sense and be fair if the predicted grades were several % higher than previous years to take them down. This could disadvantage certain gifted pupils. I'd like to see the predicted grades vs previous year grades to know how different they were. We have to use predicted grades as mock exams could have been set to different standards or be an amalgamation of previous year's papers which it would be possible pupils may well have seen We didn't know what the state of the pandemic would have been in June and in hindsight Exams could have been sat apart from vunerable students who could hae been given a predicted mark. Having a choice of to sit the exam or a predicted mark would have been a big decision for any student to make and to be given the choice of using the higher mark would have given them an unfair advantage on other years. You couldn't have an "on the day decision" as schools wouldn't know how many would turn up. There would have been wasted work by teachers and exam authorities. The only way I could have seen this working would have been if they had been given the choice and the flexability on a subject by subject basis. So if they were taking 4 A-Levels. They might choose to sit 2 and have predicted grades for the other two or sit all four or have predicted grades for all 4. I think a lot would have split their choices and having the chance to just concentrate their revision on two subjects or less. The GCSE results will no doubt create even more issues as that year will be going into A-Levels within 2 weeks of their results coming out so have less time than the A-Level students to decide on change of plans. So you were sticking up for a political party?? They could try being better. Yep, that would help us all
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 11:05:17 GMT
Yep glad so many got in to see Ronnie win his sixth world title
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 17, 2020 8:51:49 GMT
That is so incredibly condescending. What makes you assume they're entitled? Students have been downgraded on exams they didn't sit, they actually have the right to be entitled to answers. Exam results needed to be balanced out. Would it have been fair to give this year's Exam class higher grades than last year. Next year's Exam classes have missed a big chunk of education already. How will their results be affected. A lot of people younger people think they know best. I did when I was their age. Considering that 4 and 5 year olds went back to school on 1st June in hindsight students could have likely sat their GCSEs or A-Levels or have been given the chance to sit or accept awarded grades. I was joking about the person's spelling as they were probably after a Uni place and just mocking the snowflake generation. Come on mate, that post is terrible. Government playing their now time honoured trick. Let's see how sh*te we can be. Nasty party, a very nasty party.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 10, 2020 7:53:56 GMT
I read somewhere that in the league table of western nations percentage spent on the health of total gdp, Blairs investment only took us up to fighting for european places (upper mid table). Under Thatcher we were fighting relegation and we returned to that point under the coalition. Wonder what Thatcher's 1987 spend was all about?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 5, 2020 15:54:23 GMT
Closing things in the evenings, daytime okay but travel restrictions. I thought they’d be trying out “all work and no play” lockdowns and this looks like a version of it. This outbreak was largely linked to a few bars so a lot of innocent people have been affected. NS isn't messing about with the Schools back next week. Maybe if it is the younger generation socializing which is causing these outbreaks or perhaps more correctly people recklessly socializing then hopefully others will start holding them to account as it was when the finger was pointed at certain Asian centric areas. Some younger Asian people may well have been ignoring guidelines but if they did cause outbreaks within their family or community I could well see them being held to account by their peers. We still need to know why our death rate has been so high even highlighted by the Orange President last night. Don't forget the Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Patrick Vallance talked about 20k deaths. People of his standing don't pluck a figure out of the air. That was likely a medium case scenario ballpark figure which would have been researched. So he might have been expecting something in say 15 to 25k region. Wasn't he saying 250k two weeks before that?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Cash
Aug 4, 2020 13:10:17 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 4, 2020 13:10:17 GMT
It seems Birds has now sacked a store manager of 25 years' standing, with 44 years' service to the company, for using common sense. Her only 'crime' was accepting cash from customers like this 94 year old, then paying with her own debit card. Well they have made their nest now...
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 15:49:25 GMT
This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the nasty party. Not much to like there. Good question, how bad did the government need to handle this before you say, these aren't really very good at government are they? We were too late going into lockdown and we need to find why we have had so many deaths compared to other countries those are the two questions I'd want answering? Do Governments totally rely on the medics and scientists or try and take the lead themselves instead? If JC had been PM, I'm sure funding luvvies would have been even further down the list. Talking sensibly now. I'd add continuous PPE failures and the worst of the lot, the care home debacle into the big questions for the independent enquiry. I might be taking this personally but they should be strung up for the treatment of the elderly and most at risk in our society shouldn't they? Bit early I think to say the medical executives advising government have done a good job. I want to see what advice they gave and the evidence why and what advice the government ignored before declaring that.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 15:19:04 GMT
Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake Hindsight is always great. We don't know how Labour would have handled it, JC, Abbott and McDonnell leading the briefings might have been something to watch. Sir Kier I'd have confident of leading a measured response. I think that the Chancellor has had his standing go up and Rishi is now a legit future Party Leader. Rabb has been authoritive and solid. No other minister has covered themselves in glory. Prof Whitty and Sir Patrick have done their job solidly, Jenny Harries again safe pair of hands, Prof JVT was excellent and the best explainer of the lot going into points but breaking it down and justifying his views with solid facts. Yvonne Doyle - way out of her depth like Dido Harding. Stephen Powis solid but unspectacular. Dr Nikki Kanani clearly a rising star not 40 yet, very articulate and media friendly. Will be likely Medical Director of PHE or go into CMO or DCMO level job in a few years time. This is a party political broadcast on behalf of the nasty party. Not much to like there. Good question, how bad did the government need to handle this before you say, these aren't really very good at government are they?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Aug 3, 2020 13:55:33 GMT
I don't see how third option could work, it could weaken a lot of healthy people and to shield the vulnerable would be hard and they could be left without care and still at risk. I think opting for the idea of herd immunity was the one absolutely unforgivable mistake the government made at the start. It depended on two speculative ideas that both turned out to be false: that if you were healthy your chances of dying were infinitesimal and that once you'd had the disease you couldn't get it again. The reality turned out to be that if you let the disease take hold throughout the population it will just keep killing people and until a vaccine has been developed and deployed it would never be safe for the most vulnerable to return to society. Come on fella, that was one of the the worst but the government has made more than one absolutely unforgiveable mistake
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Jul 31, 2020 14:40:03 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 31, 2020 14:40:03 GMT
More right wing than Starmer's Labour Party?? Tory party isn't it For many years the SNP were a right wing party, and until fairly recently were proposing Scotland becomes a low tax state, or at least following the lead of the Republic of Ireland in giving tax breaks to the multi-nationals. It was only when they realised they needed to win votes from Labour that they shifted emphasis to social justice. But it was still based on the idea of not wanting to share the oil money with the rest of the UK. Now there's no tax revenue from oil, and Scotland would miss out on additional spend equivalent to the budget for the NHS in Scotland, and the idea of a left-wing Scexit to benefit the poor is less realistic than the imagined left-wing Brexit. It's all very well for the wealthy ideological nationalists to claim they are OK with a 'minor' reduction in wealth in exchange for 'sovereignty', but I think even most of them underestimate the immediate reduction in budget that would come with the end of Barnett, never mind the hit on the economy, or what happens when the disaster capitalists get involved. At present (pre COVID), the Scottish budget is running on a deficit of about 8% which is sustainable within the UK, but not as an independent state. The EU would require it to be no more than 3% so not only would it take years to be eligible to join, it would only happen after years of austerity that would make the last decade seem like a time of plenty. It's not just a case of cutting services or raising taxes, or dreaming of record breaking growth, to bring the deficit down. Then there's the question of currency, and while it's possible to keep using the pound, using another country's currency means less control over fiscal policy. Establishing a new currency is very, very expensive, and any country without an established currency, or healthy economy can only borrow on much higher interest rates, which adds to the expense. Then, like Brexit, there's the hit on the economy from creating new barriers with your main trading partners. Hoping that increased exports to non-UK countries will make up for it, is akin to the Tories announcing they're working on a great new deal with Australia. That said, Brexit was a terrible idea that will make us poorer and people voted for it, so logic doesn't always get a look in when people have convinced themselves of their own national superiority, and have believed politicians who have spent years blaming Brussels/Westminster for their own failings. Ironically, so much of the Brexit campaign used the messaging of the 2014 nationalist one. No voters were called anti-Scottish, and any question about ensuring public services would function properly were batted away with claims of fear mongering. Healthy scepticism was labelled as cowardice and so on. Any problems could be eliminated if only people were more positive. And if you thought banging on about WW2 was cringe-worthy, we had references to Bannockburn, which was exactly 700 years earlier. In short, the SNP try to be all things to all people. They try to win votes from Labour voters by claiming left-leaning credentials, which are not compatible with their nationalist agenda. Then they claim green credentials, which was at odds with their assumption of record North Sea oil extraction which was to fund their nationalist agenda. They were cutting council tax, a very Tory policy, while framing it as a tax cut to help the poor! Already the SNP have been sneaking in cuts to council budgets that were well in excess of the cuts from Westminster during austerity. They just blamed those cuts on Westminster, and used it as a reason to become independent. The spare money being spent on SNP vanity projects, and pay rises for the growing number of SNP ministers in the Scottish Government. In case you didn't know, Sturgeon's salary as First Minister is higher than Boris Johnson as PM, which is higher than Mark Drakeford as the First Minister of Wales. Second jobs come into play here - I'm not feeling sorry for Johnson here, but while Gordon Brown was giving the British PM a pay cut, the SNP were organising pay increases for Scottish Government ministers and justifying it as patriotic. Does Brexit make people poorer in Scotland but Independence and if Scotland is able to join join the EU make them a little richer than a UK Brexit Scotland?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Jul 31, 2020 11:44:42 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 31, 2020 11:44:42 GMT
More right wing than Starmer's Labour Party?? Tory party isn't it For many years the SNP were a right wing party, and until fairly recently were proposing Scotland becomes a low tax state, or at least following the lead of the Republic of Ireland in giving tax breaks to the multi-nationals. It was only when they realised they needed to win votes from Labour that they shifted emphasis to social justice. But it was still based on the idea of not wanting to share the oil money with the rest of the UK. Now there's no tax revenue from oil, and Scotland would miss out on additional spend equivalent to the budget for the NHS in Scotland, and the idea of a left-wing Scexit to benefit the poor is less realistic than the imagined left-wing Brexit. It's all very well for the wealthy ideological nationalists to claim they are OK with a 'minor' reduction in wealth in exchange for 'sovereignty', but I think even most of them underestimate the immediate reduction in budget that would come with the end of Barnett, never mind the hit on the economy, or what happens when the disaster capitalists get involved. At present (pre COVID), the Scottish budget is running on a deficit of about 8% which is sustainable within the UK, but not as an independent state. The EU would require it to be no more than 3% so not only would it take years to be eligible to join, it would only happen after years of austerity that would make the last decade seem like a time of plenty. It's not just a case of cutting services or raising taxes, or dreaming of record breaking growth, to bring the deficit down. Then there's the question of currency, and while it's possible to keep using the pound, using another country's currency means less control over fiscal policy. Establishing a new currency is very, very expensive, and any country without an established currency, or healthy economy can only borrow on much higher interest rates, which adds to the expense. Then, like Brexit, there's the hit on the economy from creating new barriers with your main trading partners. Hoping that increased exports to non-UK countries will make up for it, is akin to the Tories announcing they're working on a great new deal with Australia. That said, Brexit was a terrible idea that will make us poorer and people voted for it, so logic doesn't always get a look in when people have convinced themselves of their own national superiority, and have believed politicians who have spent years blaming Brussels/Westminster for their own failings. Ironically, so much of the Brexit campaign used the messaging of the 2014 nationalist one. No voters were called anti-Scottish, and any question about ensuring public services would function properly were batted away with claims of fear mongering. Healthy scepticism was labelled as cowardice and so on. Any problems could be eliminated if only people were more positive. And if you thought banging on about WW2 was cringe-worthy, we had references to Bannockburn, which was exactly 700 years earlier. In short, the SNP try to be all things to all people. They try to win votes from Labour voters by claiming left-leaning credentials, which are not compatible with their nationalist agenda. Then they claim green credentials, which was at odds with their assumption of record North Sea oil extraction which was to fund their nationalist agenda. They were cutting council tax, a very Tory policy, while framing it as a tax cut to help the poor! Already the SNP have been sneaking in cuts to council budgets that were well in excess of the cuts from Westminster during austerity. They just blamed those cuts on Westminster, and used it as a reason to become independent. The spare money being spent on SNP vanity projects, and pay rises for the growing number of SNP ministers in the Scottish Government. In case you didn't know, Sturgeon's salary as First Minister is higher than Boris Johnson as PM, which is higher than Mark Drakeford as the First Minister of Wales. Second jobs come into play here - I'm not feeling sorry for Johnson here, but while Gordon Brown was giving the British PM a pay cut, the SNP were organising pay increases for Scottish Government ministers and justifying it as patriotic. So not a fan of the SNP?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 31, 2020 7:42:37 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/12253551/meghan-harry-exiled-royals-made-bed-poll/'ALMOST half of Brits think Meghan and Harry should be exiled from the Royal Family because they have “made their bed”, a poll has revealed. Four in 10 believe the pair should be permanently ousted - with more than half branding their controversial biography Finding Freedom “inappropriate”. ' 'Prince Andrew is the UK’s least favourite royal, with Meghan second from bottom.' 'The Queen remains the UK’s favourite royal, with Prince Harry in second place - despite the public backlash. Kate is the third most popular, with husband William close behind, followed by Princess Anne and then Prince Charles.'
Media having an impact but the unwanted findings are hidden only the wanted ones in the headline.
I can't be the only one uncomfortable with the Sun link? I think we should try choose our sources a little better
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 30, 2020 15:14:28 GMT
I'm not sure that's really true anymore in the US. Nicole Kidman and Reese Witherspoon as an example both did Big Little Lies on HBO and both have since gone on to other TV projects such as The Undoing in the case of Nicole Kidman and Little Fires Everywhere in the case of Reese Witherspoon. This is a good point, as there is now 'prestige' tv and non-traditional channels (cable tv, streaming, etc.). I tend to forget about those. I wonder, too, if it's easier for an established movie actor to move into tv than vice versa (Lily Tomlin and Jane Fonda would be two other examples). TV budgets much bigger now. Netflix and HBO series have huge budgets
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Jul 30, 2020 15:04:44 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 30, 2020 15:04:44 GMT
Will it stay majority unionist, though, if screwed over by a government in Westminster that hasn't taken their needs into account? Particularly among the younger generation - the youngsters are used to not being impacted by a border with either Ireland or the UK, and not having their daily lives disrupted or endangered by the Troubles. What are they actually getting out of being part of a Union that treats them like an afterthought? It shouldn't, but it will, because there are too many people who grow up indoctrinated into the extremist ends of the political spectrum. You only have to walk down certain streets in the suburbs of Belfast (or anywhere else in the country) and see the amount of flags, divisive murals (not all murals, but some) and painted kerb stones to realise why some things in NI will sadly never change. The local news still regularly contains reports of paramilitary shootings and arson attacks, and there are sizeable sections of NI society that are still hugely narrow-minded and intolerant. That is part of the reason I left. Aren't catholics catching up protestants in terms of population?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Brexit
Jul 30, 2020 15:02:52 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 30, 2020 15:02:52 GMT
People say Nicola Sturgeon will bring in more right wing policies while distracting people about a Scottish referendum. E.g. "SNP is more right wing than Labour but I will vote for SNP because of their stance on Scottish independence even though I prefer Labour's policies" More right wing than Starmer's Labour Party?? Tory party isn't it
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 20:31:27 GMT
I went to work today. I went to clear my locker. I have no idea when or if I will walk back into that particular Theatre (or any other theatre) again. It's very odd, no goodbye party, no fuss, just over (for the time being). Can I ask which theatre? A sad day
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 20:16:11 GMT
I’ve reached the point where I don’t care if I die of this f***ing virus. Are you ok fella?
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 13:13:25 GMT
I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning. His salary is probably what you said even more so he could stick his hand in his pocket and lead from the front. I'm always of the thought give rather than encourage others to do so, they can claim most of it back as tax relief too. I equate this with the multimillionaires being on these charity records or concerts. Think he does already. Big driver in footballers giving up wages for food banks and you can see which charities locally in Manchester he supports. A very impressive young man. Point of order though, Trent will captain the National side longer term
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 12:35:00 GMT
So the alternative is to deny children of their education? That is just too big of a sacrifice. Split classes and blended learning, laptops/tablets for every student, compulsory masks for all in schools, HEPA air filters in every room. Harvard have produced an excellent guide as to how to do so safely. Of course there’s still the increased mobility and mixing that schools create but, if the wider community thinks it can cope with that risk, then it’s quite possible. The key, however, is to plan for zerocovid, bash it down as far as you can, not to have consistent low level community transmission. The government made a choice to reopen bars and restaurants, a choice that makes opening other things more difficult (such as theatres). Really, really good post that
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 12:33:57 GMT
But research now pretty much closes down the idea that schools are a big transmission risk - seems to show that children are far far less likely to transmit the virus as well as be affected by it, so unlikely that schools would make such a difference. Like theglenbucklaird says, probably population, geography, etc is key as well as hitting the circa 20% rate in key areas like Stockholm, which seems to be the point at which transmission drops, regardless of what else you do. I’m afraid you’ve been misinformed on schools. Initially that was the belief but (like aerosol and asymptomatic transmission) that has changed for most who are studying this. The issue was that they weren’t testing children enough and, even when they did, looked for the wrong things or presumed the wrong things. Israel, for example, has seen a massive rise because they reopened schools with reduced distancing, full classes and (when it got hot for a few days), no masks. Remind you of plans for anywhere? Successful reopenings were in areas of near zero transmission plus reduced class sizes, full distancing and/or compulsory masks. Given that children (and this we do know) have a less serious response many are asymptomatic or with negligible symptoms and so transmission is coming into a household via children. What happened in Sweden is another piece in the puzzle. This is a useful summary. Second time Dr Zoe Hyde tweets have been copied to me in the last week
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 12:26:51 GMT
So the alternative is to deny children of their education? That is just too big of a sacrifice. Or we find other ways, if the situation is more long term
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 12:22:45 GMT
That's a fair point - look how quickly Marcus Rashford got a policy change. Other people had been banging on about it for ages, it only took a few days for the government to U-turn once he got involved. (I am absolutely counting down the days for the tabloids to dig up - or manufacture - some kind of 'scandal' involving Rashford. It's their M.O. - build someone up as a hero so you can knock them down again.) Marcus Rashford whilst I could say considering he is likely on 100k plus a week and could fund a load of free meals himself does seem like a very well meaning and high character person. He has struck me as the sort of person who will become a captain of his club and country in due course and also be an excellent role model. I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning.
|
|