mommysboy

Ok, so what about the old saying "born a socialist die a tory"! In my opinion, most people do become more conservative (small 'c') as they age and you are in a minority who don't. Similarly, many who are pro independence today will be pro union in 30 year's time.

I agree about Foden being a talented player, but I don't think he would have made much of a difference. England just lacked zip for some reason. Actually, it was the Henderson substitution that probably steadied the ship. I'm afraid to say, as matters stand, England will only progress to the latter stages if we revert to 5 at the back. Don't know why our midfield gets so subdued, but there it is.

As I explained in reality it meant once in a generation (30-40 years), and since when has it been every few years, or when the losing side just decides the time is right? But if you just want to go about playing semantics rather than discussing some very intractable issues I have raised........!

And it was agreed that it was a once in a lifetime vote (in practice 30-40 years). We are the UK. Many more people want it to stay that way than want it changed. Even if it is a 50/50 thing, what Scots nationalists don't realise is that even in Scotland about 50% of the people won't want it. They push 'freedom' and 'independence' for all Scots like it really really matters, but don't give a toss for the half of their countrymen that don't want it. And of course Scotland is just about as free as a country can be anyway- probably more so than England actually, which is wholly bound by UK law.

From the wording used at the time- in practice 'once and for all' is interpreted as once in a generation- every 30 or 40 years. Mock ye not!

That's the other point- the UK is a democracy. The whole of the UK should be involved. Last vote was really upsetting.

That's my point- a buggers muddle that can never be allowed to happen again, and would be on the cards. Personally I believe a super majority is needed, and the agreement of most significant regions. That should have been the rules for Brexit ref imo.

The referendum was framed by SNP (not Westminster) which actually gave the SNP a significant advantage. I believe it was thought that expats, mostly living in the UK, would mainly vote to remain in the UK.

Well, yes of course, and that there may be considerable division both within the UK, and in Scotland, where significant parts are fiercely pro union. The matter was done and dusted just 8 years ago, and it was agreed that it was a once and for all referendum. These referendums are so divisive and any result would likely not be definitive anyway- causing more problems than it solves.

Might want to save that one for the knock-out stages (if you support one of the fancied teams) Just to remind people of what really should be the case. This is what is happening in Vietnam and most likely the rest of the football supporting world : https://footballarroyo.co.uk/watch-fifa-world-cup-on-vtv/

No. In the first instance there is a 'free to air' principle. They contributed about 25%, but formed an unholy alliance with CP. But it's really the Commision's fault for letting them do it. And this happened because they were underfunded by the Gov. SNAFU https://www.nationthailand.com/thailand/general/40022215

AIS and other digital service providers could have cut a deal with TRUE I suppose. But the whole thing was a rushed last minute job as usual, meaning millions of people are unable to watch all the free to air matches. Nobody looks good, least of all the Gov.

I guess the old fuddy duddies in power aren't quite up to the digital age. Anyone know where to buy an indoor aerial then?

I've got one of those bundle deals through AIS with dozens of channels including all the ones listed as showing the footy. I watched the opening match on True4u and TSsports7, but last night was no go (copyright message) on both and it wasn't on any other channels. Some buggers muddle I dare say. I listened to BBC radio instead. This is supposed to be free to air!

I don't know if this is part of the same issue, however I was unable to watch the footy last night. I got the channels but I just saw a 'sorry for inconvenience message' and something about broadcasting rights. I have an AIS tv package. What makes it odd is that I was able to watch the opening match. Oh well, this is Thailand, and never a truer cliche. I listened to the radio commentary on BBC. It's pretty good actually.

Well, vaccination rates are really high in the UK- there aren't many unvaccinated left. Most people who die are very old and/or very sick already. A vaccine can not stop death itself.

I had 2 pfizer and 1 moderna booster. That booster gave me some unpleasant side effects. 9 days later I caught covid, at the gym I think. It was also unpleasant. Nevertheless, I think the vaccines are useful for vulnerable groups. Being over 60, I will reluctantly take another after a year or so.

And the rest!!

When you say 'itchy cough', you might possibly mean a dry unproductive cough. Omicron seems to particularly attack the throat and larynx, which can result in the symptoms you describe long after the infection has gone. I generally suffer it, even from regular coughs as I initially have very heavy nasal symptoms causing a post nasal drip. It's not nice, but will get better. It's not really anything to do with long Covid (I'm guessing).

Thanks for the heads up! Some will wear a mask and adjust their behaviour a bit, others won't. There's nothing more we can practicably do about it, is there? I suppose the main concern must be whether it's any more serious than previous Omicron variants, and so far the scant evidence suggests that it may even be milder. My intuition is that because most people have had the virus at least once, and are at least double jabbed that this latest outbreak will be of some public concern, but certainly not an emergency. Actually I've got a belter of a cold right this moment. I'm going to bed for a rest. I should be fine in a day or two just like when I had Covid19 a few weeks ago. Most people have the same experience. Let's look after the elderly and vulnerable better, maybe!

Debt restructuring is arguably just a cover up for debt default really, since the conditions that likely caused the debt to build up are unlikely to be resolved. If someone can't pay, they can't pay, and it's up to the creditor to assume the loss, always been the way.

And it'll be no surprise when they rule in his favour when the next controversy comes up.

Certainly the shape of things to come. And if products like this can be used/adapted to prevent the common cold then what a boon! Many people like myself suffer heavy ENT symptoms; it's miserable. On the other hand, if you are in the majority of people for whom a cold is just a sniffle then I can understand why you wouldn't be interested. I think most people agree that allowing your body to naturally develop its own antibodies is the optimal solution- it's called a healthy immune system. Could be invaluable for some though.

It's all very well looking at the situation now and then judging the past, but I remember that in the UK even with some existing restrictions, serious illness and death increased at a frightening pace with the original more serious variants, like Delta. When it got to 1600 deaths a day there had to be a total lockdown. Who knows where it would have gone! I also remember that when vaccines were first rolled out, the death rate plummeted. Omicron is of course another matter, and I simply don't understand why some on this forum seem to want to perpetuate a crisis that really no longer exists.

60% is totally believable, in fact it would be surprising if it were less than that, and it is probably at least 70% by now. The majority don't even know they are infected, and many others suffer from a cold, which is largely indistinguishable from any other or indeed a bad allergy day.