Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Journal Of The Plague Year. The politics of Covid-19

SystemSystem Posts: 12,170
edited February 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A Journal Of The Plague Year. The politics of Covid-19

According to this model all humans on earth will be infected by Corona Virus ( Started from Wuhan in China ) by Sept. this year.#coronavirusindia #coronarvirusSCARY. pic.twitter.com/SM4s2vcOkP

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited February 2020
    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    "kill people in the millions". Everyone needs to get a grip.

    Don't take my word for it, but the Singapore health minister. A country with world class experience in managing new viral disease, a transparent government and the most number of cases outside China to study and draw conclusions from.

    "While there is no evidence of widespread transmission of Covid-19, it is important for us to be prepared...over the past the past week, we have learned more about the nature of the virus based on emerging trends … and it is clearly emerging that the Covid-19 is different from Sars. In fact, it’s closer to H1N1 [swine flu] or influenza.

    Please help me stop the rumours. It is difficult enough, challenging enough for us to try to stop the spread of the virus. I want to say, categorically, that we have no plans to go to Dorscon red."
  • moonshine said:

    "kill people in the millions". Everyone needs to get a grip.

    Don't take my word for it, but the Singapore health minister. A country with world class experience in managing new viral disease, a transparent government and the most number of cases outside China to study and draw conclusions from.

    "While there is no evidence of widespread transmission of Covid-19, it is important for us to be prepared...over the past the past week, we have learned more about the nature of the virus based on emerging trends … and it is clearly emerging that the Covid-19 is different from Sars. In fact, it’s closer to H1N1 [swine flu] or influenza.

    Please help me stop the rumours. It is difficult enough, challenging enough for us to try to stop the spread of the virus. I want to say, categorically, that we have no plans to go to Dorscon red."

    This doesn't really refute "it is possible that this disease will kill millions of people" (albeit most of them old people who would have died fairly soon of something else).
  • Good piece. A couple of related angles that would be really interesting:

    1) The politics that really matters here is China's politics. What's going on over there? Is Anatole still around?

    2) The economics also affects the politics. A lot. What's going to happen to the world economy? Tell us, @rcs1000
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    moonshine said:

    "kill people in the millions". Everyone needs to get a grip.

    Don't take my word for it, but the Singapore health minister. A country with world class experience in managing new viral disease, a transparent government and the most number of cases outside China to study and draw conclusions from.

    "While there is no evidence of widespread transmission of Covid-19, it is important for us to be prepared...over the past the past week, we have learned more about the nature of the virus based on emerging trends … and it is clearly emerging that the Covid-19 is different from Sars. In fact, it’s closer to H1N1 [swine flu] or influenza.

    Please help me stop the rumours. It is difficult enough, challenging enough for us to try to stop the spread of the virus. I want to say, categorically, that we have no plans to go to Dorscon red."

    This doesn't really refute "it is possible that this disease will kill millions of people" (albeit most of them old people who would have died fairly soon of something else).
    You might think that if you don't read the Singaporean Dorscon definitions. It is also worth noting that 10% of the island caught Swine Flu.

    We could instead all sit here and scare each other round the camp fire.

    Quite a lot of people will regrettably die from this outbreak. Some of those will be far too young. But the balance of data suggests nothing like the hyperbolic statements coming from some.
  • moonshine said:


    You might think that if you don't read the Singaporean Dorscon definitions. It is also worth noting that 10% of the island caught Swine Flu.

    OK so I looked that up and it says red means "disease is severe and spreading widely". I think everybody agrees that outside China the disease is not yet spreading widely? Antifrank's "worst case" is that it does...

    https://www.gov.sg/article/what-do-the-different-dorscon-levels-mean
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
  • moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
  • speedy2speedy2 Posts: 981
    Only one thing is certain, that whatever happens there will still be a silly cheap BBC quiz show:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnd1jKcfBRE
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
  • moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
    Wise words. Consider them next time you enthusiastically fall in behind a campaign that frightened voters into falsely believing that hordes of Muslims were about to descend on Britain and before trying to delegitimise opponents by claiming they are mentally ill.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    He really does
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    "kill people in the millions". Everyone needs to get a grip.

    Don't take my word for it, but the Singapore health minister. A country with world class experience in managing new viral disease, a transparent government and the most number of cases outside China to study and draw conclusions from.

    "While there is no evidence of widespread transmission of Covid-19, it is important for us to be prepared...over the past the past week, we have learned more about the nature of the virus based on emerging trends … and it is clearly emerging that the Covid-19 is different from Sars. In fact, it’s closer to H1N1 [swine flu] or influenza.

    Please help me stop the rumours. It is difficult enough, challenging enough for us to try to stop the spread of the virus. I want to say, categorically, that we have no plans to go to Dorscon red."

    This doesn't really refute "it is possible that this disease will kill millions of people" (albeit most of them old people who would have died fairly soon of something else).


    We could instead all sit here and scare each other round the camp fire.

    Quite a lot of people will regrettably die from this outbreak. Some of those will be far too young. But the balance of data suggests nothing like the hyperbolic statements coming from some.
    Nailed it.

    I'm off Asia on Friday for a work-holiday. Hugely looking forward to it. My brother's been in Hong Kong and says the media over here are panic-whipping.

    Meek's 'best case' is probably the worst case and there are plenty of alternatives that the virus has peaked and continues the decline it has shown. Outside of mainland China and floating petri dishes (cruises) it's not the doomsday scenario some would have us believe.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    From a political pov I agree. But for pure box office it's got to be the two business titans surely? Bloomberg's the only one Trump fears, partly because he's a bigger beast in the jungle.

    By the way I never replied to you about weather: big apologies. I do indeed use the NW site, if you can remember the message you sent. Hope your work is going well.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609
    A good piece Alastair.

    I think the next few days of figures from Japan are going to be key to how this story plays out. The long, infectious, incubation period quite probably means it’s already too late to contain it globally, and almost certainly across Asia.

    OPEC estimate that demand for oil from China is 30% down on the start of the year, which gives possibly the best estimate from outside as to how much of the economy there is shut down. Hyundai has suspended production at three Korean car plants already, due to lack of parts supply from China, and effect probably going to cause shutdowns elsewhere as parts in tight supply chains run out. In the medium term, it could affect things like the new Apple iPhone launch, which a multi-billion dollar annual event across most of the developed world.

    I think there’s a serious threat to the Olympics unless the Japan outbreak is quickly contained, and as you noted a lot of international sporting and cultural events have already been cancelled across a lot of Asia.

    From the political view, we are probably looking at a global recession by the end of this year, and western nations are going to look carefully at how reliant they have become on outsourced production in Asia generally and China specifically - where there is a chance of a reaction against the government over their handling of the virus.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609
    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,358
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
    I have to laugh at the MPs having lack of downtime, most of them spend the majority of their time in the subsidised bars and restaurants living high on the hog on our cash , with a few interruptions to go vote. Must be the cushiest job in the country. Don't get me started on the holidays the f***ers vote for themselves either.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218
    edited February 2020
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
  • Very interesting thread header.

    The things that have most been occupying my mind is (1) how it may lead some Western firms to diversify their supply chains away from just China alone, which seems to manufacture everything - just turn over hard product to see it’s “made in china” mark - and (2) how the UK might keep going under a lockdown, with consultants like me largely doing remote-working and teleconferencing, but others in health, freight transport, power, food supply, police and the emergency services really do have to go in. And the military will need to help too. I imagine there will be designated routes with permits and cards, plus protective wear and care guarantees for families at home. And extra pay.

    Economically, schools remaining open are critical. If they close a lot of parents like me simply won’t be able to work, because you can’t do it from home when you have a toddler to look after.
  • Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    Losing over £3k would take most of the fun out of it for me.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609
    On topic, the Japanese are to start testing drugs usually used to treat HIV, against the COVID-19 virus. Apparently some HIV drugs have worked against similar viruses in the past.

    https://science.slashdot.org/story/20/02/18/2357221/why-are-hiv-drugs-being-used-to-treat-the-new-coronavirus
  • rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    Re Klobuchar and Warren, is there any evidence of a ladies' lane? Are some voters looking specifically for a female candidate? If so, this would predict crossover between them despite their political differences, and would also provide an incentive to hang on in there and hope the other drops out. Has the polling (or Iowa) suggested this?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,464

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    Losing over £3k would take most of the fun out of it for me.
    While one has to sympathise with Mr R's financial loss, Bloomberg knows where some at least of Trumps bodies are buried, and unquestionably he'd use that knowledge.
    We are due to get Trumps tax returns early in the summer, are we not?
  • rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    From a political pov I agree. But for pure box office it's got to be the two business titans surely? Bloomberg's the only one Trump fears, partly because he's a bigger beast in the jungle.

    By the way I never replied to you about weather: big apologies. I do indeed use the NW site, if you can remember the message you sent. Hope your work is going well.
    It is possible that Bloomberg will continue his anti-Trump campaign even if he is not the candidate.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    SeanT is going have go on the benzos after reading that. His hysteria was already at Threat Level: Midnight.
  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    edited February 2020
    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    Re Klobuchar and Warren, is there any evidence of a ladies' lane? Are some voters looking specifically for a female candidate? If so, this would predict crossover between them despite their political differences, and would also provide an incentive to hang on in there and hope the other drops out. Has the polling (or Iowa) suggested this?
    I'm not suggesting a "ladies lane". I'm saying that Klobuchar is "more lefty" than Biden, Buttigieg or Bloomberg, while Warren is "more moderate" than Sanders.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    F1: testing starts today. My predictions:
    1) Journalists get overexcited by Ferrari.
    2) Mercedes revive their annual classic "Gosh, we might not win this time".
    3) Everyone's a little bit sad the Williams isn't better.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,932
    edited February 2020
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    Re Klobuchar and Warren, is there any evidence of a ladies' lane? Are some voters looking specifically for a female candidate? If so, this would predict crossover between them despite their political differences, and would also provide an incentive to hang on in there and hope the other drops out. Has the polling (or Iowa) suggested this?
    I'm not suggesting a "ladies lane". I'm saying that Klobuchar is "more lefty" than Biden, Buttigieg or Bloomberg, while Warren is "more moderate" than Sanders.
    Cool (and it was me suggesting a girly lane).
  • rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    From a political pov I agree. But for pure box office it's got to be the two business titans surely? Bloomberg's the only one Trump fears, partly because he's a bigger beast in the jungle.

    By the way I never replied to you about weather: big apologies. I do indeed use the NW site, if you can remember the message you sent. Hope your work is going well.
    It is possible that Bloomberg will continue his anti-Trump campaign even if he is not the candidate.
    I think he's said words to that effect, though whether that will involve continuing splurging millions and millions at the same level...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,491
    edited February 2020
    malcolmg said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
    I have to laugh at the MPs having lack of downtime, most of them spend the majority of their time in the subsidised bars and restaurants living high on the hog on our cash , with a few interruptions to go vote. Must be the cushiest job in the country. Don't get me started on the holidays the f***ers vote for themselves either.
    I think being an MP is one of the hardest jobs there is.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    From a political pov I agree. But for pure box office it's got to be the two business titans surely? Bloomberg's the only one Trump fears, partly because he's a bigger beast in the jungle.

    By the way I never replied to you about weather: big apologies. I do indeed use the NW site, if you can remember the message you sent. Hope your work is going well.
    It is possible that Bloomberg will continue his anti-Trump campaign even if he is not the candidate.
    I think he's said words to that effect, though whether that will involve continuing splurging millions and millions at the same level...
    That’s chicken feed to him.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    On the plus side in the event of a worst case scenario this season's EPL may be cancelled and Liverpool don't get to be champions.

    What we are currently seeing is a decline in both the number of new cases in China both for new infections and for deaths. The former may be because public health is simply overwhelmed but the latter is a lagging indicator and is consistent with the virus having peaked at some point in late January. So far deaths outside China have been completely trivial and there has been a significant level of infection for a month now. This is a bit mysterious but yesterday this was linked to on here: https://www.eturbonews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/risk.jpeg
    It suggests that there is a genetic predisposition in Chinese and east Asian populations to have more ACE2 blood cells which are an important element in the transmission of the virus.

    Whilst there is clearly going to be economic disruption from supply chains in China I am not sure that this will cause an economic recession, especially by the end of the year. The disruption is now and should show in Q1 figures. It is very likely to put Germany into a formal recession given their dependency on exports. In the UK the effect is so far mainly in retail with the like of Bicester suffering.

    My tentative conclusion is that the worst case is indeed upon us: Liverpool are going to get to be champions.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    From a political pov I agree. But for pure box office it's got to be the two business titans surely? Bloomberg's the only one Trump fears, partly because he's a bigger beast in the jungle.

    By the way I never replied to you about weather: big apologies. I do indeed use the NW site, if you can remember the message you sent. Hope your work is going well.
    It is possible that Bloomberg will continue his anti-Trump campaign even if he is not the candidate.
    I think he's said words to that effect, though whether that will involve continuing splurging millions and millions at the same level...
    He’s not in any danger of running out of money, that’s for sure. Not sure what he does if Sanders in the nominee though, does he support the overt socialist or does he do a Ross Perot?
  • Dura_Ace said:

    SeanT is going have go on the benzos after reading that. His hysteria was already at Threat Level: Midnight.

    He’s a drama writer - goes with the creative process.

    But he does rather come across as the sort of person who lives to shout “fire!” on a submarine.
  • Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    Losing over £3k would take most of the fun out of it for me.
    While one has to sympathise with Mr R's financial loss, Bloomberg knows where some at least of Trumps bodies are buried, and unquestionably he'd use that knowledge.
    We are due to get Trumps tax returns early in the summer, are we not?
    It’s my own fault. Whenever I get greedy I end up with end on my face.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    Interestingly the number of reported cases and the mortality rate does seem to be quite low in the under thirties, the risk is more of them being asymptomatic spreads.

    I think there is reasonable evidence that the rather draconian containment in Hubei is working, with only 77 fatalities at last count outside that province, and decreasing numbers of new cases. How sustainable the restrictions are in the medium term is debatable.

    While on a population level the worst case scenario of 400 000 UK fatalities would be in the same order as the Spanish Flu, and a fairly substantial economic hit for a couple of years, this is not an extinction level event. Potentially personally very tragic to many individual families though.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    Hasn't Buttegieg fizzled out? He doesnt seem to be picking up all that much after his good start, what's his strategy now?
  • It seems that the extreme actions in China are causing the rate of growth of the virus to slow there, but that is in a context of extreme measures enforced by a government with no checks on its powers. The figure to keep an eye on is the number of cases outside China, which unfortunately is still growing exponentially.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    No, it wouldn’t.
    This is supposed to be a democratic contest, not a reality show. That a candidate could well be able to buy the nomination is not so much fun as depressing.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052

    Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser.

    He’s worried there won’t be cheap unskilled migrants to carry his sedan chair .
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    You want four more years of Trump then?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?
    That’s how I read Robert’s comment too. I can’t see the field getting that small so quickly, especially given the two contenders. One of Klobuchar and Buttigeig is probably going to hang around for a bit IMO,
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    TGOHF666 said:

    Alastair Meeks has turned into a cross between Eeyore and Private Fraser.

    He’s worried there won’t be cheap unskilled migrants to carry his sedan chair .
    He'll alway have the political cess-pit that is Hungary.....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    You want four more years of Trump then?
    No one has noticed, but Trump is running Corbyn-esque fiscal policies. Spending is running about 15% ahead of tax receipts.

    That's been done exactly once before, during the GFC.

    The Piper will have to be paid. Better it is Trump than anyone else.
  • Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?
    That’s how I read Robert’s comment too. I can’t see the field getting that small so quickly, especially given the two contenders. One of Klobuchar and Buttigeig is probably going to hang around for a bit IMO,
    I can see Biden endorsing Bloomberg, which might boost him in Super Tuesday and lead him to runaway as the moderate candidate.

    But, I think Democratic primary voters and delegates would baulk at Bloomberg becoming nominee so it’d also boost Sanders.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Apparent confirmation of asymptomatic infectivity:

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2001899
    In addition to the preplanned multistep process of screening for signs and symptoms of infection and observing the asymptomatic cohort in quarantine, we decided to offer a throat swab to test for SARS-CoV-2 in each of the 115 travelers who had passed triage. A total of 114 passengers consented to the test.
    Two of the 114 persons (1.8%) in this cohort of travelers who had passed the symptoms-based screening tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR (cycle threshold value in the two samples, 24.39 and 30.25, respectively). Testing with a second protocol consisting of two commercial sets (LightMix Modular SARS and Wuhan CoV E-gene, and LightMix Modular Wuhan CoV RdRP-gene, both produced by TIB MOLBIOL) and retesting of the positive samples at the Institute of Virology, Philipps University Marburg, in Marburg, Germany, confirmed the results. In addition, the isolation of SARS-CoV-2 from both samples in cell culture of Caco-2 cells indicated potential infectivity (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org).
    These two persons were subsequently isolated from the cohort and transferred to the Infectious Disease Unit at University Hospital Frankfurt for further evaluation and observation on the following day. After a thorough evaluation in the hospital ward, a faint rash and minimal pharyngitis were observed in one patient. Both patients remained well and afebrile 7 days after admission....
  • kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    Hasn't Buttegieg fizzled out? He doesnt seem to be picking up all that much after his good start, what's his strategy now?
    He’s still the leading moderate and currently has more delegates than Sanders, I think.

    That isn’t bad. I wouldn’t quit if I were in that position and still had funds.

    But, Bloomberg’s money is crowding everyone else out.

    He really is a pest.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    OT if Warren gets 2% less than this and Sanders gets 3% less so nobody clears the 15% hurdle, what happens to the delegates???

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229961052999254016

    I asked the same question yesterday. It's properly bonkers.

    Simply, the current primary system is designed to whittle down the number of challengers rapidly. But that hasn't happened this time.
    Worse still, they all still think they’re in the race, we are going to head to Super Tuesday with at least six contenders standing.
    Well... there are currently five campaigns with delegates (in order of number of delegates...):

    Buttigieg
    Sanders
    Warren
    Klobuchar
    Biden

    In addition, there are another *two* candidates who either are polling well nationally, or are likely to gain delegates in Nevada or South Carolina: Steyer and Bloomberg.

    So... there are currently seven candidates of note. (And Tulsi Gabbard.)

    Of these seven, four are in the moderate lane (Baemy, Biden. Bloomberg, Buttigieg) and two in the left lane (Warren and Sanders), and one in the "who the fuck knows lane" (Steyer). There is also some cross-over, in particular I would reckon Klobuchar (who's on the left side of the moderate lane) and Warren (who'd on the right side of the left lane).

    Of the seven, three have absolutely no money worries: Bloomberg and Steyer are billionaires, while Sanders has been a money raising machine.

    Behind these three is Buttigieg, who has consistently ranked second behind Sanders for money raising. (And who has been relatively frugal with his spending.)

    And then there are Warren, Klobuchar and Biden.

    Biden's staff bills alone are $1m/week. Klobuchar and Warren's will be little less.

    If Biden bombs in Nevada (and he may not), then I believe he will be in serious financial trouble. He might be able to soldier on to SC. But that's it.

    Warren is also struggling.

    Klobuchar has little money, but at least her operation is cheap.

    My forecast: Warren, Klobuchar and Biden drop out before Super Tuesday. Buttigieg immediately after,
    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?
    That’s how I read Robert’s comment too. I can’t see the field getting that small so quickly, especially given the two contenders. One of Klobuchar and Buttigeig is probably going to hang around for a bit IMO,
    As soon as one drops out, the other suddenly has much less incentive to follow suit. Especially if they pick up their endorsement on the way out.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,218
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    Hasn't Buttegieg fizzled out? He doesnt seem to be picking up all that much after his good start, what's his strategy now?
    I'm saying what I'd rather watch, not what I think is likely.

    (In a normal year, being first in delegates after two states would make you favorite...)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    You want four more years of Trump then?
    No one has noticed, but Trump is running Corbyn-esque fiscal policies. Spending is running about 15% ahead of tax receipts.

    That's been done exactly once before, during the GFC.

    The Piper will have to be paid. Better it is Trump than anyone else.
    But he wont pay. What will he care at that point? He'll have won. The other impacts of a Trump presidency need avoiding even if it means he's not there when the piper comes calling .
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,609
    edited February 2020

    Sandpit said:



    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?

    That’s how I read Robert’s comment too. I can’t see the field getting that small so quickly, especially given the two contenders. One of Klobuchar and Buttigeig is probably going to hang around for a bit IMO,
    I can see Biden endorsing Bloomberg, which might boost him in Super Tuesday and lead him to runaway as the moderate candidate.

    But, I think Democratic primary voters and delegates would baulk at Bloomberg becoming nominee so it’d also boost Sanders.
    Agreed. Bloomberg v Sanders would also be a bitter fight to the death at the convention, with a lot of the supporters of the losing candidate likely to stay at home in November. It would give Donald a landslide.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,153
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    Hasn't Buttegieg fizzled out? He doesnt seem to be picking up all that much after his good start, what's his strategy now?
    I'm saying what I'd rather watch, not what I think is likely.
    I know, I'm trying to establish if theres a viable path to what youd like to see.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Foxy said:

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    Interestingly the number of reported cases and the mortality rate does seem to be quite low in the under thirties, the risk is more of them being asymptomatic spreads.

    I think there is reasonable evidence that the rather draconian containment in Hubei is working, with only 77 fatalities at last count outside that province, and decreasing numbers of new cases. How sustainable the restrictions are in the medium term is debatable.

    While on a population level the worst case scenario of 400 000 UK fatalities would be in the same order as the Spanish Flu, and a fairly substantial economic hit for a couple of years, this is not an extinction level event. Potentially personally very tragic to many individual families though.

    The threats to the economy in the short to medium term are twofold: the actual effect of Alastair’s scenarios in anything from medium to worst case, and the temporary effect of people’s over-reaction if the number of cases and number of deaths outside China continues to climb. Even if it’s futile, people are going to spend a lot of time trying to avoid the disease and that is going to hit economic activity, most obviously in activities that involve going out and mixing with people.

    The most apposite comparison would appear to be the major flu epidemic during World War One, about which there is relatively little in the media consciousness because it happened during wartime and censorship.

    The remarkable thing, so far, is how the world’s stock markets have assumed this will turn into another false alarm like SARS. Yet it isn’t so long that even a worry about a China-specific downturn was enough to produce falls in the FTSE and Dow. I’d suggest that the panic alone has the potential to bring about a major sell off, when it reaches Wall Street, and if so then there are investment risks and betting opportunities.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    edited February 2020

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    There were more new cases on the Cruise Ship yesterday than non-Hubei China combined. Outside of Hubei, there are but a handful of deaths in each province. In fact even within Hubei, the deaths are concentrated in Wuhan, where the health system collapsed, most likely through long standing mismanagement and corruption by the local communist party.

    The mad annual rush for golden week was 4 whole weeks ago. In the days before Wuhan was placed on lock down, the numbers that left the city (or transited through it) were likely In excess of a million. The incubation period is a max of 14 days but typically shorter. We should by now be at tens of thousands of serious cases outside of Hubei and internationally if the apocalypse was coming. We don’t see that.

    Put simply the lock down is a show of authoritarian force, the “hospital” built in 6 days what we would call a dead cat, to disguise policy and governance failures in Wuhan. They had to fill wechat with videos of something other than dead bodies lying unattended in hospital corridors.

    You will look back with wonder that you really thought this could “seriously put globalisation into decline”. In terms of attributable deaths, it’s worse than SARS (2k). One can suppose it will end up being as bad as 2018 influenza (60k deaths). Perhaps it will be as bad as 2009 swine flu (650k deaths). Perhaps it will be even worse. But the level of hysteria is a consequence not of the progression of the disease so far but of the policy response from China.

    And because few seem to properly understand how and why the communist party does what it does, you are all shitting your pants that this is Dustin Hoffman’s Outbreak meets Winslet’s Contagion. Relax. And I speak as someone living in Singapore that has a 2 year with a yet be fully diagnosed respiratory complaint that required a late night A&E visit this week.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    DavidL said:

    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.

    I would say that it is too early to tell. We know this virus has a longer incubation period and more protracted course than Flu. Flu mostly kills with secondary bacterial infection, but that doesn't seem to be the case with Covid 19. It seems to be mostly a primary viral pneumonia, with secondary multi organ failure, often induced by an excessive inflammatory response (cytokine storm).

    We will know in about a months time if the containment is working. If it breaks out across Asia then it is probably going to hit us big time by the summer.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,951
    edited February 2020
    Frankly, if containment efforts fail, the mortality rate is 2% and everyone is going to get it by September anyway, so what is the point of dramatically curtailing economic activity with draconian restrictions on movement and freedom?

    2% of people, mostly the elderly and infirm, are going to die. That's bad. But the 98% who go on living need a functioning economy to survive.

    Treating it like the black death when it is in fact more like a particularly nasty flu is going to tank the global economy for years, leading to far worse consequences for the living.

    Those of you who think you are going to be able to work from home... for who? Who will you work for if the company that employs you goes belly up because nobody is there to man the factories or the shops or buy the products?

    If we're all going to get it anyway, keep calm and carry on is the only way forward. I suppose it has a better ring to it than "keep working until you drop dead" at least. Although that would be more in keeping with late capitalism.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    For those who want some detailed figures:

    https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

    Mainland China has - we are told - 74,186 cases of COVID-19.

    Out of a population of 1,435,000,000.

    Good to see the total recovered number finally getting some momentum.

    And the number of cases outside China not.

  • GideonWiseGideonWise Posts: 1,123
    Foxy said:

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    Interestingly the number of reported cases and the mortality rate does seem to be quite low in the under thirties, the risk is more of them being asymptomatic spreads.

    I think there is reasonable evidence that the rather draconian containment in Hubei is working, with only 77 fatalities at last count outside that province, and decreasing numbers of new cases. How sustainable the restrictions are in the medium term is debatable.

    While on a population level the worst case scenario of 400 000 UK fatalities would be in the same order as the Spanish Flu, and a fairly substantial economic hit for a couple of years, this is not an extinction level event. Potentially personally very tragic to many individual families though.

    It looks like mortality rates are lower where there is the opportunity for intensive medical support. This can be done for a select few patients. Outside of Hubei this is the case. If it takes off however, like in Hubei where they are clearly overwhelmed, the mortality rates are far higher. Why would we be any different? Wishful thinking I am afraid.

    I imagine you walk round a busy hospital every day. How exactly can that system cope, when it is currently teetering, when you chuck into the mix a deadly new virus.

    In terms of containing the thing if it kicked off here. Does the UK have the social capital and trust in government to put up with a draconian containment policy? Does the US under Trump?

    So yes not an extinction level event(!) But 400,000 deaths and extreme disruption to public life. That would make the 2008 financial crash look like a pathetic joke.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.

    I would say that it is too early to tell. We know this virus has a longer incubation period and more protracted course than Flu. Flu mostly kills with secondary bacterial infection, but that doesn't seem to be the case with Covid 19. It seems to be mostly a primary viral pneumonia, with secondary multi organ failure, often induced by an excessive inflammatory response (cytokine storm).

    We will know in about a months time if the containment is working. If it breaks out across Asia then it is probably going to hit us big time by the summer.
    I think that the evidence is quite strong that the draconian steps taken in China itself are working. What is less certain is what is going on in Japan, Indonesia, the Koreas and Vietnam. If transmission takes off there in the same way as it did initially in China I agree that this is going to be hard to stop unless it fizzles out in the same way as SARS and H1N1 did.

    What is also clear is that most health systems in most countries run at capacity most of the time, sometimes a little over. A virus like this that is not all that deadly but does require significant numbers of elderly people in particular to have extended treatment has alarming resource implications.

    I am not seeking to trivialise this but some of the coverage borders on the hysterical.
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    You want four more years of Trump then?
    No one has noticed, but Trump is running Corbyn-esque fiscal policies. Spending is running about 15% ahead of tax receipts.

    That's been done exactly once before, during the GFC.

    The Piper will have to be paid. Better it is Trump than anyone else.
    As Bush's Vice-President Dick Cheney said, "Reagan showed us that deficits don't matter".
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    DavidL said:

    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.

    Spring 2009 wasn't a happy point for the world's stock markets, although you are right that the panic proved short lived.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    edited February 2020

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    You want four more years of Trump then?
    No one has noticed, but Trump is running Corbyn-esque fiscal policies. Spending is running about 15% ahead of tax receipts.

    That's been done exactly once before, during the GFC.

    The Piper will have to be paid. Better it is Trump than anyone else.
    As Bush's Vice-President Dick Cheney said, "Reagan showed us that deficits don't matter".
    really.. sometime the lenders will stop lending or Trump will have to print zillions of dollars.

    THERE IS NO MAGIC MONEY TREE
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited February 2020
    kyf_100 said:

    Frankly, if containment efforts fail, the mortality rate is 2% and everyone is going to get it by September anyway, so what is the point of dramatically curtailing economic activity with draconian restrictions on movement and freedom?

    2% of people, mostly the elderly and infirm, are going to die. That's bad. But the 98% who go on living need a functioning economy to survive.

    Treating it like the black death when it is in fact more like a particularly nasty flu is going to tank the global economy for years, leading to far worse consequences for the living.

    Those of you who think you are going to be able to work from home... for who? Who will you work for if the company that employs you goes belly up because nobody is there to man the factories or the shops or buy the products?

    If we're all going to get it anyway, keep calm and carry on is the only way forward. I suppose it has a better ring to it than "keep working until you drop dead" at least. Although that would be more in keeping with late capitalism.

    I completely agree with that and if the containment efforts fail, that's the rational response.

    I doubt, however, that would be the response.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    For those who want some detailed figures:

    https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

    Mainland China has - we are told - 74,186 cases of COVID-19.

    Out of a population of 1,435,000,000.

    Good to see the total recovered number finally getting some momentum.

    And the number of cases outside China not.

    Again what is noticeable is the trivial number of deaths outside Hubei even in mainland China. What made the residents of Hubei so vulnerable? Had pollution there made the residents particularly vulnerable in some way? Is there some secondary disease factor that was or is more local? Was local incompetence, which the Chinese have acknowledged, enough? It would be great to have some answers to this because it would give us a much clearer idea of what the threat is to everyone else.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.

    Spring 2009 wasn't a happy point for the world's stock markets, although you are right that the panic proved short lived.
    It was one of those stock market tumbles that had very little effect in the real economy. We may well get that again. Stock markets are very high at the moment bouyed by cash pumped into the system by governments who see growth slowing.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    edited February 2020
    moonshine said:

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    There were more new cases on the Cruise Ship yesterday than non-Hubei China combined. Outside of Hubei, there are but a handful of deaths in each province. In fact even within Hubei, the deaths are concentrated in Wuhan, where the health system collapsed, most likely through long standing mismanagement and corruption by the local communist party.

    The mad annual rush for golden week was 4 whole weeks ago. In the days before Wuhan was placed on lock down, the numbers that left the city (or transited through it) were likely In excess of a million. The incubation period is a max of 14 days but typically shorter. We should by now be at tens of thousands of serious cases outside of Hubei and internationally if the apocalypse was coming. We don’t see that.

    Put simply the lock down is a show of authoritarian force, the “hospital” built in 6 days what we would call a dead cat, to disguise policy and governance failures in Wuhan. They had to fill wechat with videos of something other than dead bodies lying unattended in hospital corridors.

    You will look back with wonder that you really thought this could “seriously put globalisation into decline”. In terms of attributable deaths, it’s worse than SARS (2k). One can suppose it will end up being as bad as 2018 influenza (60k deaths). Perhaps it will be as bad as 2009 swine flu (650k deaths). Perhaps it will be even worse. But the level of hysteria is a consequence not of the progression of the disease so far but of the policy response from China.

    And because few seem to properly understand how and why the communist party does what it does, you are all shitting your pants that this is Dustin Hoffman’s Outbreak meets Winslet’s Contagion. Relax. And I speak as someone living in Singapore that has a 2 year with a yet be fully diagnosed respiratory complaint that required a late night A&E visit this week.
    A post with some insight into how the CCP operates - millions could die and they won’t give a shit as long as the CCP remains the ultimate power. Have you had the displeasure of living in China?

    That said, the cancelling of the big party meetings next month doesn’t help the argument that everything’s getting better, suggesting, “go back to work it’s perfectly safe for the workers, but not for the leaders”.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    Charles said:

    @AlastairMeeks

    You should know better than to write this kind of fact-light scaremongering article on this platform

    Covid-19 is an nv coronavirus. These are well known. Zoonosis is a well understood phenomenon. Contagion in China was bad in one province because the Wuhan politicians were idiots.

    The Diamond Princess contagion rates are pleasingly low given that they are in a confirmed area with vectors that can transmit the virus between passengers

    In the U.K. 8 of the 9 infected individuals have already been released from hospital.

    Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS. We are going to be fine.

    Well at least it makes a change from his scaremongering over Brexit I suppose
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    edited February 2020
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:



    So, you’re saying the race after Super Tuesday (in just 13 days time) will be between just Sanders and Bloomberg?

    That’s how I read Robert’s comment too. I can’t see the field getting that small so quickly, especially given the two contenders. One of Klobuchar and Buttigeig is probably going to hang around for a bit IMO,
    I can see Biden endorsing Bloomberg, which might boost him in Super Tuesday and lead him to runaway as the moderate candidate.

    But, I think Democratic primary voters and delegates would baulk at Bloomberg becoming nominee so it’d also boost Sanders.
    Agreed. Bloomberg v Sanders would also be a bitter fight to the death at the convention, with a lot of the supporters of the losing candidate likely to stay at home in November. It would give Donald a landslide.
    Sanders would likely win it in the end, only a third of Democrats are fiscal centrists like Bloomberg, Bloomberg would need a big turnout from independents to beat Sanders

    https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1229897933786615809?s=20
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    Sandpit said:

    A good piece Alastair.

    I think the next few days of figures from Japan are going to be key to how this story plays out. The long, infectious, incubation period quite probably means it’s already too late to contain it globally, and almost certainly across Asia.

    OPEC estimate that demand for oil from China is 30% down on the start of the year, which gives possibly the best estimate from outside as to how much of the economy there is shut down. Hyundai has suspended production at three Korean car plants already, due to lack of parts supply from China, and effect probably going to cause shutdowns elsewhere as parts in tight supply chains run out. In the medium term, it could affect things like the new Apple iPhone launch, which a multi-billion dollar annual event across most of the developed world.

    I think there’s a serious threat to the Olympics unless the Japan outbreak is quickly contained, and as you noted a lot of international sporting and cultural events have already been cancelled across a lot of Asia.

    From the political view, we are probably looking at a global recession by the end of this year, and western nations are going to look carefully at how reliant they have become on outsourced production in Asia generally and China specifically - where there is a chance of a reaction against the government over their handling of the virus.

    The outbreak in Wuhan is serious, but in all likelihood the epidemic in this city is likely to be towards the most severe end of the viruses capabilities. The crisis hit in the middle of winter, in a large city with a high population density. I suspect that millions there live in substandard housing. Those physical conditions are very good to spread quickly as the virus is contagious like a cold and promotes severe pneumonia. Then there are the structural problems; the Chinese health system was not well prepared for this epidemic and coping with an outbreak of any new disease is much harder than an outbreak of a known disease.

    It is likely that the disease will spread to many parts of the world, as it is highly contagious. In most countries it is likely that the outbreaks will not be so extreme. The whole world is observing and learning from the quarantine experiments and the medical and pharma labs are focusing a lot of attention on the pathology. In rich countries the ability to treat symptoms preventing the worst of the cardio-pulmonary problems from developing will have a large effect, as will warm and dry housing, and by the time the disease sets roots down in the UK it will already be middle of spring.

    The worst case scenario is possible but by definition is unlikely. Much more likely is a disease that infects as many people as swine flu did, but the symptoms being for most people like a bad case of flu.

  • malcolmg said:


    I have to laugh at the MPs having lack of downtime, most of them spend the majority of their time in the subsidised bars and restaurants living high on the hog on our cash , with a few interruptions to go vote. Must be the cushiest job in the country. Don't get me started on the holidays the f***ers vote for themselves either.

    I think being an MP is one of the hardest jobs there is.
    You are probably both right, and that an MP's job is either very hard or very cushy depending how conscientious the MP is. Devote your life to select committees and constituency work or just turn up when the whips tell you and sit in the subsidised bars till the division bell rings; and let your staff draft all replies for signature. In a safe seat it is almost entirely a matter of conscience.

    If it were down to me, I'd pay MPs a bit more, say £100k to bring them into line with doctors and head teachers, and increase (and professionalise) their staff, but realistically no government will pay to create more informed, troublesome backbenchers. Governments want lobby fodder, and prefer to force through flawed legislation than risk headlines about U-turns.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    Again to put it in perspective on current trends it seems vanishingly unlikely that Covid-19 will cause as many deaths as the H1N1 Swine flu did. The latter killed up to half a million people: https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-h1n1-swine-flu-770496

    Does everyone remember the international recession in 2009/10 caused by Swine flu? Thought not.

    Spring 2009 wasn't a happy point for the world's stock markets, although you are right that the panic proved short lived.
    It was one of those stock market tumbles that had very little effect in the real economy. We may well get that again. Stock markets are very high at the moment bouyed by cash pumped into the system by governments who see growth slowing.
    Absolutely. But it's the investment and betting opportunities that I am focused on right now; stocking up on canned food and barring the door can come later.

    Even on the more optimistic scenarios there is likely to be a great buying opportunity coming along, as proved the swine flu dip of March/April 2009.
  • Charles said:

    @AlastairMeeks

    You should know better than to write this kind of fact-light scaremongering article on this platform

    Covid-19 is an nv coronavirus. These are well known. Zoonosis is a well understood phenomenon. Contagion in China was bad in one province because the Wuhan politicians were idiots.

    The Diamond Princess contagion rates are pleasingly low given that they are in a confirmed area with vectors that can transmit the virus between passengers

    In the U.K. 8 of the 9 infected individuals have already been released from hospital.

    Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS. We are going to be fine.

    Given the French health minister yesterday said that the possibility of Covid-19 spreading worldwide was “both a working assumption and a credible risk", you will have to accept that your view is not universally held.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,751
    edited February 2020
    matt said:

    moonshine said:

    Good thread. I think even in your best case scenario there is going to be a long lasting scarring effect. The Higher Education system is particularly exposed now to Chinese students. The enormous building of luxury student accommodation is looking a bit of a nightmare for those investors.

    I'd say it has the potential to seriously put globalisation into decline. That's the best case.. I'm puzzled how Moonshine is claiming the balance of data shows this is all going to be OK. Please can you point us in the direction of this data?

    .
    A post with some insight into how the CCP operates - millions could die and they won’t give a shit as long as the CCP remains the ultimate power. Have you had the displeasure of living in China?

    That said, the cancelling of the big party meetings next month doesn’t help the argument that everything’s getting better, suggesting, “go back to work it’s perfectly safe for the workers, but not for the leaders”.

    I have spent more time in the interior provinces of China than anyone would want and I have a first hand insight into how party officials operate over several years. Your comment that they don't care how many die so long as power is retained is correct and it perfectly sums up the initial complacency, followed by throwing the army and forced quarantine at the problem. Some see the Chinese response as having been helpful, I disagree. It's almost certainly led to a higher mortality rate in Wuhan than will be seen anywhere else and it's this that is driving the debate, not the numbers actually infected which frankly is pretty irrelevant.

    Serious questions need to be asked of that chap from Imperial College with his "400k UK deaths" scaremongering on live tv.
  • malcolmg said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution in pursuit of a mad obsession. What’s been taken away is any sense that Britain is a country where decency and moderation wins out. It’s now a country where people like you enthusiastically fall into line behind xenophobic lies and look to impose a destructive Brexit on the rest of us. One day you will realise just how disgustingly you and other Leavers have behaved. In the meantime, the country continues to degrade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
    I have to laugh at the MPs having lack of downtime, most of them spend the majority of their time in the subsidised bars and restaurants living high on the hog on our cash , with a few interruptions to go vote. Must be the cushiest job in the country. Don't get me started on the holidays the f***ers vote for themselves either.
    I think being an MP is one of the hardest jobs there is.
    And all the ‘perks’ are long gone. A take home pay of £920 a week that involves regularly travelling back and for between London and your constituency and maintaining two homes (second home rent covered) with no food allowance.

    I don’t earn that now, but I would be much worse off financially taking on those responsibilities than I am now.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,609
    If it should break out into the UK population, then FFS will people who have an illness stay at home and end the stoic culture of "never missed a day's work in my life me *sneeze* have to soldier on *cough cough cough* people rely on me...*sneeze*"
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,065
    Charles said:

    @AlastairMeeks

    You should know better than to write this kind of fact-light scaremongering article on this platform

    Covid-19 is an nv coronavirus. These are well known. Zoonosis is a well understood phenomenon. Contagion in China was bad in one province because the Wuhan politicians were idiots.

    The Diamond Princess contagion rates are pleasingly low given that they are in a confirmed area with vectors that can transmit the virus between passengers

    In the U.K. 8 of the 9 infected individuals have already been released from hospital.

    Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS. We are going to be fine.

    Treating 9 cases in one country is totally different from treating thousands in one city. I agree with "Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS." As to your statement "We are going to be fine." this is true at a national level, although it might well cost a lot of money which had been planned for elsewhere. But try telling the relatives of the fatalities that "Everything's fine"
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Neutrals must be hoping for Trump vs Bloomberg.

    Wouldn't that just be Box Office?! Apart from the fact it's a serious business, it would be huge fun.

    While Bloomberg stands the better chance of winning, I'd much rather watch Buttigieg vs Trump.

    Hasn't Buttegieg fizzled out? He doesnt seem to be picking up all that much after his good start, what's his strategy now?
    I'm saying what I'd rather watch, not what I think is likely.

    (In a normal year, being first in delegates after two states would make you favorite...)
    Though Buttigieg lost the popular vote in the first 2 states and was tied in delegates in NH with Sanders
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    kyf_100 said:

    Frankly, if containment efforts fail, the mortality rate is 2% and everyone is going to get it by September anyway, so what is the point of dramatically curtailing economic activity with draconian restrictions on movement and freedom?

    2% of people, mostly the elderly and infirm, are going to die. That's bad. But the 98% who go on living need a functioning economy to survive.

    Treating it like the black death when it is in fact more like a particularly nasty flu is going to tank the global economy for years, leading to far worse consequences for the living.

    Those of you who think you are going to be able to work from home... for who? Who will you work for if the company that employs you goes belly up because nobody is there to man the factories or the shops or buy the products?

    If we're all going to get it anyway, keep calm and carry on is the only way forward. I suppose it has a better ring to it than "keep working until you drop dead" at least. Although that would be more in keeping with late capitalism.

    That's not really human behaviour, though, it it? If widespread infection arrives in the UK and the death rate is even 0.2%, let alone 2%, people aren't going to be striding confidently onto the tube thinking "I'm bound to get it sooner or later anyway..."
  • Very interesting thread header.

    The things that have most been occupying my mind is (1) how it may lead some Western firms to diversify their supply chains away from just China alone, which seems to manufacture everything - just turn over hard product to see it’s “made in china” mark - and (2) how the UK might keep going under a lockdown, with consultants like me largely doing remote-working and teleconferencing, but others in health, freight transport, power, food supply, police and the emergency services really do have to go in. And the military will need to help too. I imagine there will be designated routes with permits and cards, plus protective wear and care guarantees for families at home. And extra pay.

    Economically, schools remaining open are critical. If they close a lot of parents like me simply won’t be able to work, because you can’t do it from home when you have a toddler to look after.

    Do toddlers go to school?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    If it should break out into the UK population, then FFS will people who have an illness stay at home and end the stoic culture of "never missed a day's work in my life me *sneeze* have to soldier on *cough cough cough* people rely on me...*sneeze*"

    People are already moving away from anyone who coughs or sneezes on transport, haven't you noticed?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    Trump approval with registered voters = 45.6%

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/
  • IanB2 said:

    If it should break out into the UK population, then FFS will people who have an illness stay at home and end the stoic culture of "never missed a day's work in my life me *sneeze* have to soldier on *cough cough cough* people rely on me...*sneeze*"

    People are already moving away from anyone who coughs or sneezes on transport, haven't you noticed?
    As it happens, I have a cold at the moment. I had a double seat to myself this morning on a crowded train. The guy who sat down next to me thought better of it after a few minutes.

    #itsprobablynotcovid19
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148

    malcolmg said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:

    I suppose I would feel pretty bitter if I woke up one day to find my nationhood and sense of identity had been taken away from me. For example if the UK became a provincial authority of the United States of Europe.

    There aren’t many of them in Britain but I guess there are some whose sense of national self identity was that of “EU Citizen”. That sucks for you guys, hope you feel better in time because it must feel terrible right now. Doesn’t do much good throwing rocks at each other in the meantime.

    It’s nothing to do with national self-identity. It’s the appalling realisation that a large body of the population is willing to and has trashed every civic institution rade.
    Dude you need to take a holiday / get more sleep.

    "People like me". "Xenophobic". "behaved disgustingly".
    You personally smeared your opponents as mentally ill. So yes, people like you.
    I find you quite interesting. Because you seem to think it is a smear to point out that MPs' mental health appeared to be at breaking point with all the MVs, public pressure and lack of downtime last year.

    As I said before, you've written some cracking headers in your time. I've even read some of them out aloud to friends, long before I stopped lurking here.

    I guess I'll leave it there because mud slinging does no good
    I have to laugh at the MPs having lack of downtime, most of them spend the majority of their time in the subsidised bars and restaurants living high on the hog on our cash , with a few interruptions to go vote. Must be the cushiest job in the country. Don't get me started on the holidays the f***ers vote for themselves either.
    I think being an MP is one of the hardest jobs there is.
    And all the ‘perks’ are long gone. A take home pay of £920 a week that involves regularly travelling back and for between London and your constituency and maintaining two homes (second home rent covered) with no food allowance.

    I don’t earn that now, but I would be much worse off financially taking on those responsibilities than I am now.
    MPs earn more than 90% of the population, get travel expenses to and from the constituency and a subsidised flat in London if their constituency is far away, there are worse jobs than being an MP
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,385
    Charles said:

    @AlastairMeeks

    You should know better than to write this kind of fact-light scaremongering article on this platform

    Covid-19 is an nv coronavirus. These are well known. Zoonosis is a well understood phenomenon. Contagion in China was bad in one province because the Wuhan politicians were idiots.

    The Diamond Princess contagion rates are pleasingly low given that they are in a confirmed area with vectors that can transmit the virus between passengers

    In the U.K. 8 of the 9 infected individuals have already been released from hospital.

    Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS. We are going to be fine.

    'The Diamond Princess contagion rates are PLEASINGLY low' is a peculiar turn of phrase under the circumstances, irrespective of any statistical evidence you may offer.
  • IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    @AlastairMeeks

    You should know better than to write this kind of fact-light scaremongering article on this platform

    Covid-19 is an nv coronavirus. These are well known. Zoonosis is a well understood phenomenon. Contagion in China was bad in one province because the Wuhan politicians were idiots.

    The Diamond Princess contagion rates are pleasingly low given that they are in a confirmed area with vectors that can transmit the virus between passengers

    In the U.K. 8 of the 9 infected individuals have already been released from hospital.

    Fundamentally this is less severe but more contagious than SARS. We are going to be fine.

    Well at least it makes a change from his scaremongering over Brexit I suppose

    Brexit isn't to blame for all this?
    Brexit, the climate emergency and transphobic language will clearly be to blame.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,148
    Andy_JS said:

    Trump approval with registered voters = 45.6%

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/voters/

    Trump got 46.1% of the popular vote when he won the EC in 2016 so virtually identical
This discussion has been closed.