beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,349
it is, though raises questions itself. like ~13k excess deaths between wk13 and wk18 that are not Covid related. bit odd and obviously related indirectly, but how?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Number of Deaths
- Thread starter Tim Over Whelmed
- Start date
it is, though raises questions itself. like ~13k excess deaths between wk13 and wk18 that are not Covid related. bit odd and obviously related indirectly, but how?
I was put off by the cost. They’re very bullish with the price, no doubt they have a large and loyal following willing to pay up.
I’d not thought of that. If you find a route, genuinely, please let me know.
Think it was about £200 for the year for full digital access. Does feel like a chunk of cash, but equates to not much more than 50p/day I suppose. Even with days where I don't get the chance to read it (or all of it), it doesn't feel like too bad value but I suspect I could easily do without it. Not due to renew until the end of the year so will see then.
I’m more of a spendthrift than a tight arse, we seem to spend on so many different things as well as nice holidays and (virtue signalling
) I’m a generous donor to charities. I draw the line somewhere and presently that includes avoiding online papers.I’d also go through long phases of not dipping in. In your normal routine of commuting, do you find Telegraph online is a useful thing to pass time?
I’m more of a spendthrift than a tight arse, we seem to spend on so many different things as well as nice holidays and (virtue signalling
I’d also go through long phases of not dipping in. In your normal routine of commuting, do you find Telegraph online is a useful thing to pass time?
Some days I pretty much read it cover to virtual cover, others I pick certain article, sometimes I skim through and occasionally I don't look at it at all. I used (years ago) to get a paper version for the morning commute, more recently did find having the online version useful other than the commute (about 55 mins home to London Bridge) isn't long enough to get through it (I'd estimate at least a couple of hours needed to properly read a weekly edition, more at the weekends). I guess to put the cost in perspective I used to buy the Standard for the homeward journey and that was 50p before they went free so on that basis the Telegraph is pretty good value.
I’m more of a spendthrift than a tight arse, we seem to spend on so many different things as well as nice holidays and (virtue signalling
I’d also go through long phases of not dipping in. In your normal routine of commuting, do you find Telegraph online is a useful thing to pass time?
Think they perpetually offer a one month free trial...maybe worth trying
Updated data from the FT and too hastily covered on BBC News a few minutes ago.
The UK’s 891 per million = 60,000 total excess deaths from all causes since March.
The UK’s 891 per million = 60,000 total excess deaths from all causes since March.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,349
i wonder how they calculate that, the difference from the 5yr average is about 46k.
I’m no scientist, but it’s far more sophisticated than that. Based on an internationally agreed formula, taking into account amongst other things the demographics of a nation eg Italy has a more elderly population than many European nations.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,349
seem it is as simple as that. count the deaths because thats free from local variation, then compare to historic average as a baseline. FT have found 14k from somewhere.
ah, England only is close to number i got, thats probably the problem, filtering in and out national figures.
Last edited:
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,922
They are in fact, in severe hock, they are trying to boost their online presence as they are losing more than other papers in printing and distribution costs/ sales. If you were to subscribe to anything, I'd suggest Private Eye, it will open your eyes.
All very early of course, fluent across the globe. For example, the ONS report UK all settings deaths earlier than some countries, whilst in today’s FT article Spain have overnight added 12,000 for past under-counting of total excess deaths. Going by Italian media articles throughout, it would not be a surprise if they made a significant uplift in their figures sometime later this year.
They are in fact, in severe hock, they are trying to boost their online presence as they are losing more than other papers in printing and distribution costs/ sales. If you were to subscribe to anything, I'd suggest Private Eye, it will open your eyes.
I often read PE in the Richard Ingrams era, a teacher’s copy at school! They were always being sued for libel in that era ... I wonder why not so much this century?
Digressing to comics, the Argus online are now playing hardball. Starting this week, you click on two or three articles and its blocks you seeing any more (other than the opening sentence). I’d never subscribe to that rag.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,922
I gave up on the Argus a long time ago ! I think it may be that the burden of proof has shifted over the years or Private Eyemay often be printing genuine facts !
The Eye was sued by Sir Jams (Jimmy Goldsmith) but won (I think) after raising money (the Goldenballs fund) from readers - that case could have finished them.
They used to be extremely reckless, however. The classic was when someone (whom, I recall not) sent a solicitor's letter, which the eye published in its letters section, that ended with 'our next steps will depend on the nature of your reply'; underneath, Ingrams wrote 'The nature of our reply is **** Off'.
The solicitors were, if I recall, called 'Arkell'. The Eye was published by Pressdram. Therafter, whenever a pompous solicitor sent a letter threatening action depending on the nature of Ingrams' reply, Ingrams always published the letter and added at the bottom 'For the nature of our reply see Arkell v Pressdram'.
And the bottom line is that taking the piss out of crooks is not illegal.
Unfortunately, perhaps, social norms have changed over time and 'reputation' now has little traction as a door opener, so when it is traduced it is hard to prove meaningful damage. In the 60s, John Profumo devoted his life to charity after his fall from grace. But 20 years later, Jeffrey Archer, a serial liar and role model for Boris, invented shamelessness.
So much has changed that today I suspect the likes of Boris and Cumface couldn't give a toss what anyone says about them unless it provides the DPP with evidence of criminality. And even then.....
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,922
The Eye was sued by Sir Jams (Jimmy Goldsmith) but won (I think) after raising money (the Goldenballs fund) from readers - that case could have finished them.
They used to be extremely reckless, however. The classic was when someone (whom, I recall not) sent a solicitor's letter, which the eye published in its letters section, that ended with 'our next steps will depend on the nature of your reply'; underneath, Ingrams wrote 'The nature of our reply is **** Off'.
The solicitors were, if I recall, called 'Arkell'. The Eye was published by Pressdram. Therafter, whenever a pompous solicitor sent a letter threatening action depending on the nature of Ingrams' reply, Ingrams always published the letter and added at the bottom 'For the nature of our reply see Arkell v Pressdram'.
And the bottom line is that taking the piss out of crooks is not illegal.
Unfortunately, perhaps, social norms have changed over time and 'reputation' now has little traction as a door opener, so when it is traduced it is hard to prove meaningful damage. In the 60s, John Profumo devoted his life to charity after his fall from grace. But 20 years later, Jeffrey Archer, a serial liar and role model for Boris, invented shamelessness.
So much has changed that today I suspect the likes of Boris and Cumface couldn't give a toss what anyone says about them unless it provides the DPP with evidence of criminality. And even then.....
I never knew this until he died and there were a few obits around. He messed up but spent much of the rest of his life atoning for his error away from public life and did amazing work for Toynbee Hall. When Johnson's career finally meets the brick wall of reality and he is dumped in disgrace or slinks off of his own accord you can bet that it will be to move to some juicy low hours/high pay directorships that require minimum effort and mental input.
Exactly.
Despite everthing Profumo understood the concept of national service. Boris understands only self service. Time to take away.....
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,470
There are a lot of parallels between Archer and Johnson and the members use to drool over him too.
Medwayseagull
JCB
I am sure the Tory sycophant collective on here could club together to give him a job. Chief Executive of " Incompetency personified" plc has a nice ring to it - Trump would insist on being Chairman of the international parent company. Mouldy Brains would be ideal as Head of Recruitment.