The problem with this thread title is that it has a floating context depending on which thread people post to at which times... and it can look kind of weird.

Yes, as you say, it's obviously not really about the tax. Just like it wasn't really taxes with Al Capone a century ago.
Just like with Assange, it wasn't really him vs Sweden over a rape allegation... extradition to the US on whatever charge was always the motivation.

Just goes to show that laws are there to be bent and twisted and exploited and applied however you want... provided you are the government. Ordinary people of course don't have that luxury.

Yes, there is a lot of pressure. England have a bad record against Germany, and have lost to them in important matches a few times. There is a big psychological barrier for England to overcome here. The players will be worried, I think... whereas Germany are more used to winning, and don't have any pressure of home advantage, either, plus expectations for their team are lower than usual.

Yes, they were so close to actually finishing in second place in the group... the final table is harsh on them, with them sitting in last place. They so nearly qualified... and really I think they were expected to get zero points and lose every game. So so close to beating Germany.

A draw would give them 4 points, which would mean they definitely qualify. But yes, I agree they're likely to win anyway.

Group F really is a difficult group. Whoever finishes second gets to beat group D winners England in the next round... but likely whoever out of France/Germany/Portugal finishes third would beat England, too.
I know that teams always try to win, but England might have been better off trying to lose their game and so avoid playing anyone from Group F in the last 16... but as it turns out, second place in England's group has ended up drawn against Spain in the next round...

Don't want to turn it into a God-memes thread, but you do have a point. I'm always reminded of this quote:


... and anyone who wants to be worshipped really shouldn't be.

What if they didn't? This is just baseless speculation, 'what if's', and stuff that people have said which has then been - I assume intentionally - misconstrued.
You need evidence, really.

Yeah, but that's more because of climate change. And those Boston Dynamics robots. Particularly the yellow dog thing.

It does if you look at the data. It's not more dangerous than other variants, but does seem to spread more easily. I've linked to the various charts and datasets in the UK quite recently in another thread, so I won't post them all again. The variant now accounts for 99% of new cases in the UK, and case numbers are rising quite quickly... fortunately, because most older people have now been vaccinated, hospitalisations and deaths and not increasing as they did in previous Covid waves.

Cases are rising mostly amongst younger people (who have not yet been offered the vaccine), and as you'd expect the more severe cases seem to be mostly amongst older people who chose not to take the vaccine when offered.


If it was just some propaganda thing to scare people, then they'd say that death rates were rising - they're not saying that.
Although maybe you'll say it's a secret plan to encourage people to get vaccinated?

Yes, this is all true. But in the past I think they haven't been great tactically, despite having good players. Southgate has apparently studied other teams and what it takes to win a tournament, and has made the team a lot more disciplined now... as the results suggest in this tournament, 1-0, 0-0, 1-0, no goals conceded.

But of course I expect them to lose in the next round against whoever they play from the France/Germany/Portugal group.

Yes, he's one of those players that you think could probably play for ever, he's hugely talented and certainly not too old. You can imagine him still performing at the highest level for a few years yet... even if he were to just stand in the centre circle for the whole game pinging passes around, he'd still be a major asset to the team. One of the all-time greats.

Yes, everyone is different. Some diets work for some people, other diets for other people. There is no single diet that works for everyone. But the fact remains that if you burn off more than you consume, then you lose weight. The solution is the same, it's just that the specific route taken (from a food perspective) to get to that solution will vary from person to person. Although some degree of exercise is generally beneficial for everyone.

Yes, because thankfully a lot of us are now vaccinated. Before the vaccine programme, a lot more people were becoming seriously ill (both in total and proportional to cases).
Here are two of the charts I posted previously, along with the cumulative vaccinations chart. You will note that in the last few months cases have risen dramatically again, but the death rate has dropped to near-zero. What could account for this? (Clue: vaccine)

Yes. I hope we can all agree on this. The body processes different foods differently. 100 calories of spinach is very different to 100 calories of chocolate. And we are biologically predisposed towards eating stuff that in large quantities is bad for us.


Government advice is one thing, and may need changing, but by itself it's not enough, because...


... because weight loss is, fundamentally, a simple maths problem, burn more than you consume. Governments and companies dispensing bad advice or encouraging us to eat unhealthy food is one thing, but as individuals we also need to take responsibility for our actions. Cigarettes come with health warnings - and in my country, with graphic images of the damage they cause printed on the packets - but people still buy them. We are told to exercise more. But we don't. Whilst governments should endeavour to give us good advice, personal responsibility remains the major factor.

Yes, I don't really understand that, either. Okay they could keep him out while he was still ahead of Perez, in the hopes he'd be able to keep his place... but once it became clear that Perez was going to finish third, Mercedes has nothing to lose going for fastest lap with Bottas. They would have remained fourth in any case, it's not like they'd have lost a place, with Norris in fifth about a minute further back.

Yes. They were over-confident, they thought they could get both cars ahead of Verstappen, and ended up with both behind him. They are starting to make a habit of tactical mistakes recently, which is quite unlike them. Probably shows the pressure they are under. We should also remember Perez's position, which stopped Hamilton doing a second stop as he'd have come out behind him.

Yes. Italy and Belgium look like the best two teams at the moment. Biggest game in the next round probably depends on whether England win their group - if they do, it's runner-up in the France/Germany/Portugal group.

I wasn't aware that anyone still believed this. The subject was settled beyond reasonable doubt many years ago... some phrases to note in the quote below are "completely discredited", "serious procedural errors", "undisclosed financial conflicts of interest", "ethical violations", and "lost his medical license".

https://www.publichealth.org/public-awareness/understanding-vaccines/vaccine-myths-debunked/

Yeah, that was my point. But really there's not even an attempt to supply information in this instance, it's just a copy/pasted meme image with zero consideration of facts or evidence. Show me the data that demonstrates that the vaccine has the same mortality rate as the virus. If the evidence can't be supplied, then the graphic — which you might be tempted, erroneously, to believe is based on evidence — is actually baseless nonsense.

If that were true, then yes. One death per 10k Covid cases and one death per 10k vaccinations would mean that the vaccine is as deadly as the virus, and so is pointless.

The only thing is... your numbers aren't correct. Look at the data. How many people have died from Covid? How many have died from vaccination?
Take the UK as an example of a highly vaccinated country. ~130k Covid deaths. Vaccinations are currently at 108 per 100 people (because 2 shots are needed), so slightly more than one vaccination per person. Are you really suggesting (with zero evidence) that there have been 130k deaths in the UK due to the vaccine? That's absurd.

I'm sure I've seen that guy somewhere before...
Oh, yeah. Here he is:




And here's the full story:
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/04/scicheck-idaho-doctor-makes-baseless-claims-about-safety-of-covid-19-vaccines/



If you want to donate to FactCheck.org, here's the link.