If the NHS in England is seen to fall short with C-19 the Tories will get the blame here, whether or not Wales, Scotland & NI are seen to do worse.
It is a crisis, and I would expect the reputation of Boris to either be enhanced or destroyed.
All I have pointed out is that Boris has an enormous accidental advantage, because of timing and geography.
To return to the example of the credit crunch, it affected the financial markets of all countries almost simultaneously.
Boris has 3 weeks warning before what happened in Italy will happen here. And he can learn from the actions that Italy, France & Germany are taking.
Any competent Government, listening to its medical. modelling and statistical experts, should be able to get this largely right.
I would put it at one and a half weeks, not 3 weeks. On 24th February Italy hit the 100 cases mark. The UK passed 100 on 6th March that's 11 days later.
Have to say I don’t take much notice of the Royal family’s goings on, and never had an opinion on Meghan Markle one way or the other. But seeing this clip of her with the young boy from Robert Clack in Dagenham on Saturday makes me think it is a real opportunity missed for the Royal Family to have a black princess. It could have given Black people a feeling of having a stake in the country, skin in the game, and bring us closer together, which I guess is what the RF are for.There is another bit where he winks as he hugs her that I can’t find, it really is great.
The Markle sparkle. It is a loss.
If black people can only identify with black people and white people only with white people then we’ve got absolutely nowhere in the last 50 years.
The key fact is that Markle brings black identification with a historically very different and arguably white institution. She's providing something distinctive, while sharing something with the whole. This is the only way genuine multiculturalism can work - not oppressive and fearful assimilation, or polarised identity politics.
Don't know how accurate this might be, but interesting.
China optimizes treatment for novel coronavirus disease https://www.shine.cn/news/nation/2003063629/ China has expanded and optimized the utilization of drugs and therapies in the treatment of the novel coronavirus disease to block the conversion of mild cases to severe cases and save critically ill patients.
Tocilizumab, with the common brand name Actemra, has been included in China's latest version of diagnosis and treatment guidelines on COVID-19.
Zhou Qi, deputy secretary-general and an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said at a press conference Friday that the drug Tocilizumab has been found effective to block the inducement of the inflammatory storm.
In an initial clinical trial, Tocilizumab was used in 20 severe COVID-19 cases. And the body temperatures of all the patients dropped within one day. Nineteen of the patients were discharged from the hospital within two weeks, and one got better, according to Zhou.
Currently, the drug is under clinical trials in 14 hospitals in Wuhan, the epicenter of the epidemic, Zhou said.
As of March 5, a total of 272 severe patients had been treated with Tocilizumab....
Something I want to be true but I take everything coming out of China with a pinch of salt. The pressure to show the world they’ve put a lid on this - “face” - is simply huge.
That said, they won’t bother/care too much about the regulations that prevent us from jumping straight to human trials in China.
They’ll start testing on ill patients as soon as they’ve got something as a calculated gamble.
These are approved drugs for other conditions, and quite well understood, so I have little doubt similar trials will already be recruiting subjects in Europe. Note these reported results appear not to be from a blinded trial, though the Chinese are now said to be recruiting for one. Published clinical trial results from China should be valid.
If that happens here we are looking at total and utter chaos aren't we?
They are predicting the peak is 2-3 weeks and that makes sense. So yes, we should prepare for 2-3 weeks of shit and chaos in April, hopefully by the summer relative normality is back. There is no reason to expect permanent shit and chaos.
The model is 3 weeks, 50% of the total to get it will go down with it, 9 weeks, 95%. So in best case scenario we are looking at 3 months of chaos.
That depends on your definition of chaos I guess. Across those 9 weeks the worst week is likely to be 5-10x as many deaths and cases as the best week. It will be an order of magnitude or two worse in its social impact.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Ironically, Brown keeping us out of the Euro made a huge positive difference. Without that, our economy would probably have gone the way southern European ones did.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
And equally hard to imagine there remains anybody who maintains that the impact of the GFC on the UK was about the modest deficit going into it rather than the fact that the City was so bloated in size, corrupt and incompetent in practice, and poorly regulated.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
If black people can only identify with black people and white people only with white people then we’ve got absolutely nowhere in the last 50 years.
Not saying that. It's more that a charismatic intelligent "modern" woman was good for the Royals. The mixed race attribute was just icing on that cake.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
And equally hard to imagine there remains anybody who maintains that the impact of the GFC on the UK was about the modest deficit going into it rather than the fact that the City was so bloated in size, corrupt and incompetent in practice, and poorly regulated.
Small deficit? It was maxed out at the limit of the "stability pact" that Labour claimed they were following. Considering it had been a surplus only a few years earlier and there'd been no downturn since it was unprecedented since the war to see the deficit blow out like that without a downturn and left us massively exposed.
Had the government been running a small surplus (as the Tories were running when the UK had last had a recession) then the resulting correction would have been manageable. Unfortunately Brown thought he'd abolished boom and bust.
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
Do you see anyone in th UK government holding out for free trade with no obligations?
Yes.
Why would the UK stick to its guns despite the crisis and the EU cave in because of it?
Because its critically important to the UK and what the government cares about. Its not critically important to the EU and the EU have other concerns they'd rather be dealing with.
Asymmetric ambitions.
I call it wishful thinking.
The FT have had some interesting articles recently on the asymmetry in the negotiations. The UK and EU have different ambitions and also different views on what happens if no trade deal is reached.
Normally in trade negotiations no trade deal would mean both sides lose out proportionately equally but that's no longer the case due to both sides having completely different ambitions. If there is no trade deal now then that moves our trading arrangements very close to what the UK is seeking and completely away from what the EU wants.
The UK government might be OK with no trade deal. I suspect a very large number of companies who sell products to or buy parts from EU countries would not be OK with it.
If the NHS in England is seen to fall short with C-19 the Tories will get the blame here, whether or not Wales, Scotland & NI are seen to do worse.
It is a crisis, and I would expect the reputation of Boris to either be enhanced or destroyed.
All I have pointed out is that Boris has an enormous accidental advantage, because of timing and geography.
To return to the example of the credit crunch, it affected the financial markets of all countries almost simultaneously.
Boris has 3 weeks warning before what happened in Italy will happen here. And he can learn from the actions that Italy, France & Germany are taking.
Any competent Government, listening to its medical. modelling and statistical experts, should be able to get this largely right.
He needs to start creating new ICU hospital beds, indeed new hospitals, today, then. No point in having the Wuhan example and not following it. Creating new ICU nurses and doctors is more problematic in the time available.
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
Do you see anyone in th UK government holding out for free trade with no obligations?
Yes.
Why would the UK stick to its guns despite the crisis and the EU cave in because of it?
Because its critically important to the UK and what the government cares about. Its not critically important to the EU and the EU have other concerns they'd rather be dealing with.
Asymmetric ambitions.
I call it wishful thinking.
The FT have had some interesting articles recently on the asymmetry in the negotiations. The UK and EU have different ambitions and also different views on what happens if no trade deal is reached.
Normally in trade negotiations no trade deal would mean both sides lose out proportionately equally but that's no longer the case due to both sides having completely different ambitions. If there is no trade deal now then that moves our trading arrangements very close to what the UK is seeking and completely away from what the EU wants.
The UK government might be OK with no trade deal. I suspect a very large number of companies who sell products to or buy parts from EU countries would not be OK with it.
They're not the ones doing the negotiations though. What matters is what the people negotiating and making the decisions think.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
And equally hard to imagine there remains anybody who maintains that the impact of the GFC on the UK was about the modest deficit going into it rather than the fact that the City was so bloated in size, corrupt and incompetent in practice, and poorly regulated.
Small deficit? It was maxed out at the limit of the "stability pact" that Labour claimed they were following. Considering it had been a surplus only a few years earlier and there'd been no downturn since it was unprecedented since the war to see the deficit blow out like that without a downturn and left us massively exposed.
Had the government been running a small surplus (as the Tories were running when the UK had last had a recession) then the resulting correction would have been manageable. Unfortunately Brown thought he'd abolished boom and bust.
Surely it was Tory boom and bust that he abolished.
If the NHS in England is seen to fall short with C-19 the Tories will get the blame here, whether or not Wales, Scotland & NI are seen to do worse.
It is a crisis, and I would expect the reputation of Boris to either be enhanced or destroyed.
All I have pointed out is that Boris has an enormous accidental advantage, because of timing and geography.
To return to the example of the credit crunch, it affected the financial markets of all countries almost simultaneously.
Boris has 3 weeks warning before what happened in Italy will happen here. And he can learn from the actions that Italy, France & Germany are taking.
Any competent Government, listening to its medical. modelling and statistical experts, should be able to get this largely right.
I would put it at one and a half weeks, not 3 weeks. On 24th February Italy hit the 100 cases mark. The UK passed 100 on 6th March that's 11 days later.
True, but you are ignoring the fact that (i) the UK case are not so far very clustered. whereas the Italian cases were strongly clustered in Lombardy and (ii) the UK's population is somewhat larger.
Any analogy between the Uk and Italy is necessarily a bit rough and ready.
Say 2 weeks, then.
But, that is 2 weeks that the Government can really use, if they are competent.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
If the NHS in England is seen to fall short with C-19 the Tories will get the blame here, whether or not Wales, Scotland & NI are seen to do worse.
It is a crisis, and I would expect the reputation of Boris to either be enhanced or destroyed.
All I have pointed out is that Boris has an enormous accidental advantage, because of timing and geography.
To return to the example of the credit crunch, it affected the financial markets of all countries almost simultaneously.
Boris has 3 weeks warning before what happened in Italy will happen here. And he can learn from the actions that Italy, France & Germany are taking.
Any competent Government, listening to its medical. modelling and statistical experts, should be able to get this largely right.
He needs to start creating new ICU hospital beds, indeed new hospitals, today, then. No point in having the Wuhan example and not following it. Creating new ICU nurses and doctors is more problematic in the time available.
There might be some scope to take back recently retired specialist doctors and nurses, or to run intensive short courses to upskill those in adjacent disciplines. The fatality rates of Chinese medics who got too close in the early stages might prove a disincentive though.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
And equally hard to imagine there remains anybody who maintains that the impact of the GFC on the UK was about the modest deficit going into it rather than the fact that the City was so bloated in size, corrupt and incompetent in practice, and poorly regulated.
Small deficit? It was maxed out at the limit of the "stability pact" that Labour claimed they were following. Considering it had been a surplus only a few years earlier and there'd been no downturn since it was unprecedented since the war to see the deficit blow out like that without a downturn and left us massively exposed.
Had the government been running a small surplus (as the Tories were running when the UK had last had a recession) then the resulting correction would have been manageable. Unfortunately Brown thought he'd abolished boom and bust.
Surely it was Tory boom and bust that he abolished.
As someone wisely said here the other day (I forget who sorry) he abolished the boom.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
According to my father we’re managing the quarantine/isolation and tracing much better.
We’re actually keeping people quarantined/isolated rather than the Italian approach which is to tell people to quarantine/isolate them then letting do whatever they like.
Top number of icu beds in Europe by far the biggest health care spender one would also need to see an age profile of those infected and wether infected through travel or community. Maybe the underlying health of their older population is better but I doubt we will know the answers for a long time.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
So the government have been promising and leaking to the press, not me claiming it. The chancellor resigned because he and his team didnt like it and his team were getting replaced.
I think that if someone is grieving for their dead Uncle Bob it's not much solace to them if a Minister argues that if they'd been in Italy they would have had it worse and their Aunt Alice would have died too.
This is not to say that I expect the government to be blamed, but I don't think relative performance will be the determining factor.
Britain might arguably have been better prepared for WWII than France, but it didn't do Chamberlain much good.
We were better prepared than France but the Frogs weren't our rivals. We weren't as prepared as the Nazis.
People die every day of every year. I'm hopeful my octagenarian and nonagenarian grandparents survive this, but accept that morbidity is an issue for everyone ultimately.
The French aren't our rivals this time either. The virus is.
My concern is that in delaying further measures to protect the economy from undue stress, Boris will end up exposing the NHS to stress that it cannot manage without there being excess deaths due to lack of ICU capacity, trained staff and equipment.
We'll see. Perhaps his timing will be optimal. I certainly hope so.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
No Tory Government has bequeathed a Budget Surplus to a Labour Government. The same applies to a Balance of Payments Surplus.
Clearly the message about how to handle this is not getting through to the NHS helpline people - or at least not all of them. Our local practice had a woman turn up last week with suspected Covid-19 having just returned from one of the hot spots. She had phoned 111, described her symptoms and recent travel and was advised to go to her GP. NHS Direct then contacted the GP to tell them she was on her way in and to be prepared to receive her.
They managed to head her off in the car park and send her home to be dealt with remotely and then had to contact NHS Direct to tell them not to be so bloody stupid as they had risked having the whole GP Surgery shut down.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
So the government have been promising and leaking to the press, not me claiming it. The chancellor resigned because he and his team didnt like it and his team were getting replaced.
No the Chancellor resigned claiming he was going to cut Income Tax by 2% - so that doesn't sound like he was overly concerned about the deficit!
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
The deficit exists, is important but rarely the most important thing. You might also recall that before the global financial crisis, our deficit was low by international standards and also low by our own historical standards. Osborne's focus on the deficit flatlined the recovery he inherited from Labour; stimulating growth would have been a better way to reduce the deficit. It is ironic that Osborne's austerity was a factor in losing the Brexit referendum and ending his own political career.
Clearly the message about how to handle this is not getting through to the NHS helpline people - or at least not all of them. Our local practice had a woman turn up last week with suspected Covid-19 having just returned from one of the hot spots. She had phoned 111, described her symptoms and recent travel and was advised to go to her GP. NHS Direct then contacted the GP to tell them she was on her way in and to be prepared to receive her.
They managed to head her off in the car park and send her home to be dealt with remotely and then had to contact NHS Direct to tell them not to be so bloody stupid as they had risked having the whole GP Surgery shut down.
The 111 lines are seriously overloaded (there was an interview with a woman in self-isolation on R4 this morning describing a week's wait to be tested as she stayed at home with a fever, after being told it would take a day...). No system is perfect, and overburdened systems don't perform at their best.
Have to say I don’t take much notice of the Royal family’s goings on, and never had an opinion on Meghan Markle one way or the other. But seeing this clip of her with the young boy from Robert Clack in Dagenham on Saturday makes me think it is a real opportunity missed for the Royal Family to have a black princess. It could have given Black people a feeling of having a stake in the country, skin in the game, and bring us closer together, which I guess is what the RF are for.There is another bit where he winks as he hugs her that I can’t find, it really is great
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
No Tory Government has bequeathed a Budget Surplus to a Labour Government. The same applies to a Balance of Payments Surplus.
In 1997 Labour inherited a golden inheritance and following Tory spending plans got to a budget surplus (as the Tories had before the prior downturn and were on their way back to getting again).
Then in 5 years with no downturn Brown smashed the surplus to pieces and maxed out the deficit. Why?
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
They were going to increase the deficit regardless of coronavirus or a downturn. And then planned to lie about it by changing definitions. The very definition of a deficit denier.
So you claim. We'll never know, all we know for certain is that the Tories reduced the deficit they inherited every year prior to the downturn, as they should have.
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
No Tory Government has bequeathed a Budget Surplus to a Labour Government. The same applies to a Balance of Payments Surplus.
In 1997 Labour inherited a golden inheritance and following Tory spending plans got to a budget surplus (as the Tories had before the prior downturn and were on their way back to getting again).
Then in 5 years with no downturn Brown smashed the surplus to pieces and maxed out the deficit. Why?
Labour inherited a Budget Deficit in 1997 , and the outgoing Tory Chancellor - Ken Clarke - later stated that he would not have adhered to his own spending plans had the Tories been re-elected.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
The deficit exists, is important but rarely the most important thing. You might also recall that before the global financial crisis, our deficit was low by international standards and also low by our own historical standards. Osborne's focus on the deficit flatlined the recovery he inherited from Labour; stimulating growth would have been a better way to reduce the deficit. It is ironic that Osborne's austerity was a factor in losing the Brexit referendum and ending his own political career.
No it wasn't. It was high by comparable historic standards.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
If it was maxed out then it could not have increased but it did so it wasn't. The credit card analogy is nonsensical.
Clearly the message about how to handle this is not getting through to the NHS helpline people - or at least not all of them. Our local practice had a woman turn up last week with suspected Covid-19 having just returned from one of the hot spots. She had phoned 111, described her symptoms and recent travel and was advised to go to her GP. NHS Direct then contacted the GP to tell them she was on her way in and to be prepared to receive her.
They managed to head her off in the car park and send her home to be dealt with remotely and then had to contact NHS Direct to tell them not to be so bloody stupid as they had risked having the whole GP Surgery shut down.
The 111 lines are seriously overloaded (there was an interview with a woman in self-isolation on R4 this morning describing a week's wait to be tested as she stayed at home with a fever, after being told it would take a day...). No system is perfect, and overburdened systems don't perform at their best.
I agree. But the very basic message of 'don't go to your local GP' can't be that hard to remember.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
Clearly the message about how to handle this is not getting through to the NHS helpline people - or at least not all of them. Our local practice had a woman turn up last week with suspected Covid-19 having just returned from one of the hot spots. She had phoned 111, described her symptoms and recent travel and was advised to go to her GP. NHS Direct then contacted the GP to tell them she was on her way in and to be prepared to receive her.
They managed to head her off in the car park and send her home to be dealt with remotely and then had to contact NHS Direct to tell them not to be so bloody stupid as they had risked having the whole GP Surgery shut down.
The 111 lines are seriously overloaded (there was an interview with a woman in self-isolation on R4 this morning describing a week's wait to be tested as she stayed at home with a fever, after being told it would take a day...). No system is perfect, and overburdened systems don't perform at their best.
I agree. But the very basic message of 'don't go to your local GP' can't be that hard to remember.
If you've taken on a load of temps to deal with the volume of calls, mistakes are going to be made.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
If it was maxed out then it could not have increased but it did so it wasn't. The credit card analogy is nonsensical.
That's like saying as a household just because you've maxed out your credit card doesn't mean you can't get further into debt. Yes you can by not paying your bills, taking on further loans etc
It shows why the panic to have hundreds of toilet rolls is so endemic, people have no understanding of reality.
Dunno if this is a good comparison Malc. Most Brits don't have a bidet or feel comfortable with using a tabo or similar, so toilet paper is perceived as a "necessity" (however many billions of people get by today or got by historically without it, including Brits from just a few generations back).
It is also something most people only keep a supply for a week or two in normal circumstances, and it's only possible to stretch such a supply out a little further by using it more frugally. It is a pretty rapidly depleted resource. On the other hand extra stocks of loo roll are relatively cheap, albeit space-consuming, and have a very long life. You're likely to get through your stock eventually so it isn't wasteful to hold extra except in the economic sense that you're holding extra inventory instead of some asset with a better financial return (and at current interest rates and stock market performance, and bearing in mind the low cost of a couple of weeks of loo roll, this is not a persuasive argument against stocking up).
Running short of loo roll and being unable to stock up, due to panic buying, economic collapse or quarantine arrangements restricting transport or shopping, would be regarded by most people as disastrous. So if there is a realistic risk of any of those happening, it becomes rational to purchase extra bog roll as part of your regular shop. Moreover the pressure on toilet paper is likely to be especially severe because almost everyone uses it and few substitutes are available (dried pasta, rice, porridge oats etc don't feature so universally in everyone's purchasing habits and there would be ready alternatives if one ran out) and you also know everyone else can see the benefits (and relatively few added costs) of holding extra at a time of uncertainty. So why not go for it and stick a couple of extra packets in your trolley at your next shop, not just one more for luck? Buying four 24-packs instead of one likely leaves you with 100+ at home if you already had some in stock. Ah, but then you know everyone else will be thinking that too, so best get your purchase in first...
There's thus a very fine line between "prudential" and "panic" buying. In times of uncertainty, as soon as there's a risk of panic buying, it becomes rational to panic buy yourself. Rather like how bank runs work. Arguably selfish and bad for the operation of the overall system, but not idiotic even if you think the main underlying risk comes from the behaviour of others and the coronavirus itself is unlikely to imminently disrupt logistical systems.
The difference will be greater than 4 to 1 because all of our beds are required for existing emergency treatments. ICU beds were already oversubscribed before the advent of the virus.
Daily new cases of coronavirus are decreasing in China and South Korea, but increasing in most countries in Europe including the UK. Some Chinese students in UK universities are said to be unhappy with the government's response to the crisis and are returning to China.
Boris Johnson has recommended frequent handwashing but has also been shaking hands with many people at a sporting event. Surely this is contradictory behaviour and maybe there is politics behind it. The government should look at what other countries are doing that is working, if we are not doing the same things, before the situation gets much worse and take the required action.
Question: internationally, what are the implications for a drop in oil price?
More Middle Eastern and North African instability. More pain for Venezuela. Probably not much change in Russia. A lot of pain for Western Oil Companies and as a result a lot of pain for the Stock Market and Pension Funds.
Basically exacerbating the problems we see already. Probably not causing any new ones specifically.
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
I've only skimmed it, so can't speak for it's accuracy in general, but I rate the author (I can read her articles in my field without tearing my hair out, which is not true of most news outlets)
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
That quote sounds exactly like Cummings. He clearly sees this as a test of his approach.
It certainly shows Cummings influence. "Science-based" is a soundbite continually used by the Johnson government, which is nevertheless the most ideological administration in all of UK history.
Interesting point from that article is that the US has 10 times as many ICU beds per capita as the UK, yet their fatality rate is currently 4% of confirmed cases.
Is the US issue that they have the facilities but you can only access them if you have insurance?
Don't know how accurate this might be, but interesting.
China optimizes treatment for novel coronavirus disease https://www.shine.cn/news/nation/2003063629/ China has expanded and optimized the utilization of drugs and therapies in the treatment of the novel coronavirus disease to block the conversion of mild cases to severe cases and save critically ill patients.
Tocilizumab, with the common brand name Actemra, has been included in China's latest version of diagnosis and treatment guidelines on COVID-19.
Zhou Qi, deputy secretary-general and an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said at a press conference Friday that the drug Tocilizumab has been found effective to block the inducement of the inflammatory storm.
In an initial clinical trial, Tocilizumab was used in 20 severe COVID-19 cases. And the body temperatures of all the patients dropped within one day. Nineteen of the patients were discharged from the hospital within two weeks, and one got better, according to Zhou.
Currently, the drug is under clinical trials in 14 hospitals in Wuhan, the epicenter of the epidemic, Zhou said.
As of March 5, a total of 272 severe patients had been treated with Tocilizumab....
I think this touches on an absolutely key point. Whether or not that particular drug proves to be effective, what will matter a lot is whether some combination of anti-viral drugs can be found to be effective in preventing cases spiralling into the need for intensive care. If so, then clearly the impact of the pandemic will be much less serious, both in economic terms and of course for the patients affected.
There has been much discussion about vaccines, but those won't be available before at least a year, maybe more. However, research on using existing anti-virals is also proceeding, and since these are already licensed as safe to use, can be deployed much more quickly, if we're lucky that they prove to be effective. Fingers crossed on that one, it's probably the best hope of limiting this scourge.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
The deficit exists, is important but rarely the most important thing. You might also recall that before the global financial crisis, our deficit was low by international standards and also low by our own historical standards. Osborne's focus on the deficit flatlined the recovery he inherited from Labour; stimulating growth would have been a better way to reduce the deficit. It is ironic that Osborne's austerity was a factor in losing the Brexit referendum and ending his own political career.
One of the reasons the GFC was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because Brown had so mismanaged the economy prior to the crash. He didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK economy suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
No.
I don't think the EU will be "taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit" whatever. I think they'll put EU interests first (which is not the same thing). Best case for EU is effective single market membership (even if not in name). Beyond that it becomes a trade off between frictionless trade and not simultaneously allowing UK to undercut on costs by lowering standards (i.e. getting a competitive advantage that the EU can't mitigate with tariff/non-tariff barriers and which would hurt their own domestic producers). If the UK wishes to diverge on standards then the EU may feel the need to apply tariffs or other barriers (latter potentially just to allow checks).
I hope (and think, assuming the extreme hardliners are not too involved) that the UK will also approach the talks with it's own interests first. There are legitimate differences of opinion on what is in UK's best interests. I'd prioritise frictionless trade with EU above all else, but others believe there would be more advantage on diverging in standards and/or getting a US trade deal (which would probably mean diverging from EU standards).
I can respect different positions on what is in the UK's best interests and whether that ultimately leads to a deal or not. I cannot respect childish ideas that the EU are out to punish us, which confuses simply putting their best interests before ours (as we're no longer EU) as we should also put our best interests before theirs - do you imagine/hope we also to have hurting the EU (possibly against our interests) as a negotiating objective?
While I would agree with that, there are elements of the EU that are too religious about things.
For example the refusal to allow the U.K. to be part of Euratom, Galileo or the pandemic warning system unless we accept free movement of people.
In a rational world people could come up with a structure that would allow collaboration where it makes sense. But they have decided that free movement is a matter of principle.
Have to say I don’t take much notice of the Royal family’s goings on, and never had an opinion on Meghan Markle one way or the other. But seeing this clip of her with the young boy from Robert Clack in Dagenham on Saturday makes me think it is a real opportunity missed for the Royal Family to have a black princess. It could have given Black people a feeling of having a stake in the country, skin in the game, and bring us closer together, which I guess is what the RF are for.There is another bit where he winks as he hugs her that I can’t find, it really is great.
The Markle sparkle. It is a loss.
If black people can only identify with black people and white people only with white people then we’ve got absolutely nowhere in the last 50 years.
The key fact is that Markle brings black identification with a historically very different and arguably white institution. She's providing something distinctive, while sharing something with the whole. This is the only way genuine multiculturalism can work - not oppressive and fearful assimilation, or polarised identity politics.
I’m not sure the monarchy had any real problem with black identification prior to the arrival of Markle, which was barely three years ago.
It’s as if the decades of work the Queen and her family (including Prince Charles and Diana) had been doing with inner cities, Commonwealth leaders and commonwealth institutions didn’t matter.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
If it was maxed out then it could not have increased but it did so it wasn't. The credit card analogy is nonsensical.
That's like saying as a household just because you've maxed out your credit card doesn't mean you can't get further into debt. Yes you can by not paying your bills, taking on further loans etc
Twice the ICU beds per capita of Italy (and 4 x more per capita than the UK)
But the numbers in intensive care are also low in Germany. We should probably compare with France, which seems to have had a similar trajectory, and hasn't run out of intensive care beds, but has 19 deaths. I suspect it's partly that not many people in Germany with serious existing health problems have been infected so far. This might not be entirely a matter of luck
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
No.
I don't think the EU will be "taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit" whatever. I think they'll put EU interests first (which is not the same thing). Best case for EU is effective single market membership (even if not in name). Beyond that it becomes a trade off between frictionless trade and not simultaneously allowing UK to undercut on costs by lowering standards (i.e. getting a competitive advantage that the EU can't mitigate with tariff/non-tariff barriers and which would hurt their own domestic producers). If the UK wishes to diverge on standards then the EU may feel the need to apply tariffs or other barriers (latter potentially just to allow checks).
I hope (and think, assuming the extreme hardliners are not too involved) that the UK will also approach the talks with it's own interests first. There are legitimate differences of opinion on what is in UK's best interests. I'd prioritise frictionless trade with EU above all else, but others believe there would be more advantage on diverging in standards and/or getting a US trade deal (which would probably mean diverging from EU standards).
I can respect different positions on what is in the UK's best interests and whether that ultimately leads to a deal or not. I cannot respect childish ideas that the EU are out to punish us, which confuses simply putting their best interests before ours (as we're no longer EU) as we should also put our best interests before theirs - do you imagine/hope we also to have hurting the EU (possibly against our interests) as a negotiating objective?
While I would agree with that, there are elements of the EU that are too religious about things.
For example the refusal to allow the U.K. to be part of Euratom, Galileo or the pandemic warning system unless we accept free movement of people.
In a rational world people could come up with a structure that would allow collaboration where it makes sense. But they have decided that free movement is a matter of principle.
The purer EU federalists and the ERG on the other side both feed off each other.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
If it was maxed out then it could not have increased but it did so it wasn't. The credit card analogy is nonsensical.
That's like saying as a household just because you've maxed out your credit card doesn't mean you can't get further into debt. Yes you can by not paying your bills, taking on further loans etc
The country is not a household.
And few if any households can borrow at anywhere near the rates of interest the UK can.
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
Can't tell from the link what it is they have actually done.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
The deficit exists, is important but rarely the most important thing. You might also recall that before the global financial crisis, our deficit was low by international standards and also low by our own historical standards. Osborne's focus on the deficit flatlined the recovery he inherited from Labour; stimulating growth would have been a better way to reduce the deficit. It is ironic that Osborne's austerity was a factor in losing the Brexit referendum and ending his own political career.
One of the reasons the GFC was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because Brown had so mismanaged the economy prior to the crash. He didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK economy suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
Let's hope we're not reading this in 10 year's time:
One of the reasons the Covid-19 crisis was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because the Conservatives had so starved the NHS of cash prior to the crisis. They didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
And this is what he should be pilloried for. He drank the City kool aid. Almost everybody else did too, but that is mitigation not defence. He was the Chancellor.
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
Can't tell from the link what it is they have actually done.
The American approach, just not testing people. They have tested significantly fewer than we have despite likely having an outbreak for much longer...
I doubt they are systematically testing the recently deceased either so we don't really know how many have died from it in Japan.
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
"If this works here .." What is "this" if I may ask?
Twice the ICU beds per capita of Italy (and 4 x more per capita than the UK)
But the numbers in intensive care are also low in Germany. We should probably compare with France, which seems to have had a similar trajectory, and hasn't run out of intensive care beds, but has 19 deaths. I suspect it's partly that not many people in Germany with serious existing health problems have been infected so far. This might not be entirely a matter of luck
You might be right - evidence from the US (lots of ICU beds but also too many deaths) supports the suggestion that it's not just a question of ICU beds.
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
Can't tell from the link what it is they have actually done.
I'm just linking to show the trends but the strategy was: - Ask people to work from home where practical - Ask people to cancel events where practical, run sporting events without spectators etc - Ask people to stay away from crowds, they spontaneously stayed at home a lot - Close schools - Handwashing etc etc
The thing about this is that it doesn't particularly destroy the economy; Everything is still working, and working from home is probably more productive for a lot of people. So it's not like China where they had to do radical things that aren't compatible with a free society.
Interesting hint of the political battle to come this morning in R4 this morning. How well prepared are we for Coronavirus? Did austerity help by impacting deficit or did it hinder by degrading our health and social care capability?
The political legacy may be a reverse of the credit crunch. Labour spent a bit too much and took their eyes of the ball but were mostly unfairly blamed for what was a global issue for a decade.
It could easily play the same way for the right over coronavirus, whatever they had done in terms of austerity probably wouldnt have made much difference on this issue, but its an obvious (if unfair and largely incorrect) conclusion to make that austerity is to blame.
That only works if the UK deaths are worse than say Germany or France.
In a global event, the obvious thing to do is compare the UK to other similar countries.
The Tories have an enormous advantage that the UK are behind Italy, France and Germany in terms of timescale.
Only if the UK death rate is say double the German or French one will it pan out as you say.
How much did the public compare what happened in the UK re credit crunch with the rest of the world? If your in charge when it happens (and the build up to it) you get the blame. You are assigning the great British public far too much rationality.
Greatly. The public rightly recognised that what happened in the UK was much worse than what happened in the rest of the world thanks to Gordon Brown's mismanagement and blamed him accordingly.
Not sure much of southern Europe would agree with you.
Yes they would. Much of Southern Europe's governments had also mismanaged their economies like Gordon Brown had mismanaged Britain's. The voters of those nations paid attention and ejected their governments like we did ours, while voters in nations that hadn't mismanaged the economy unlike Brown were less likely to eject their government in response. See for example Canada.
Gordon Brown did not mismanage the economy. Southern Europe was screwed by Germany and the Euro. Canada's rapid recovery was largely due to exports to China and the United States, aided by a drop in exchange rates. See also Australia.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
The deficit exists, is important but rarely the most important thing. You might also recall that before the global financial crisis, our deficit was low by international standards and also low by our own historical standards. Osborne's focus on the deficit flatlined the recovery he inherited from Labour; stimulating growth would have been a better way to reduce the deficit. It is ironic that Osborne's austerity was a factor in losing the Brexit referendum and ending his own political career.
One of the reasons the GFC was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because Brown had so mismanaged the economy prior to the crash. He didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK economy suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
Let's hope we're not reading this in 10 year's time:
One of the reasons the Covid-19 crisis was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because the Conservatives had so starved the NHS of cash prior to the crisis. They didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
That might well be the case though I hope not of course. Not because I care about Boris and his Government but because of the people who will have died as a result.
But of course the difference between yours and mine is that mine is a matter of historic fact whereas yours is currently a bit of speculative fiction.
Interesting point from that article is that the US has 10 times as many ICU beds per capita as the UK, yet their fatality rate is currently 4% of confirmed cases.
Is the US issue that they have the facilities but you can only access them if you have insurance?
The US is barely testing, so the mortality rate can not be believed.
Part of the explanation for China getting on top of this: (Guardian) Getting into one’s apartment compound or workplace requires scanning a QR code, writing down one’s name and ID number, temperature and recent travel history. Telecom operators track people’s movements while social media platforms like WeChat and Weibo have hotlines for people to report others who may be sick. Some cities are offering people rewards for informing on sick neighbours.
Chinese companies are meanwhile rolling out facial recognition technology that can detect elevated temperatures in a crowd or flag citizens not wearing a face mask. A range of apps use the personal health information of citizens to alert others of their proximity to infected patients or whether they have been in close contact.
State authorities, in addition to locking down entire cities, have implemented a myriad of security measures in the name of containing the coronavirus outbreak. From top officials to local community workers, those enforcing the rules repeat the same refrain: this is an “extraordinary time” feichang shiqi, requiring extraordinary measures...
As I said in the previous thread, both Singapore and S Korea (though clearly far less oppressive) have similar systems in operation.
I note the number of declared cases in Italy now exceeds that in ROK.
But Taiwan's a functioning democracy and has reportedly dealt with it well. It has fewer cases per capita than the UK. That's quite impressive given its location.
What I find more than a bit odd is that SK's rate is 3x that of China. Makes me wonder yet again about their numbers outside Hubei.
The other things I find troubling is that the number of "closed" cases ending in death has been stuck at 6% for 2 weeks now. It really should have fallen as more "minor" infections were discovered. Second, the table shows that the percentage at critical is 13% suggesting a massive health need. That seems to be a higher figure than our working assumptions.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
That quote sounds exactly like Cummings. He clearly sees this as a test of his approach.
It certainly shows Cummings influence. "Science-based" is a soundbite continually used by the Johnson government, which is nevertheless the most ideological administration in all of UK history.
It's so cool that your view of the administration as ideologically based rather than science based, is, itself, ideologically based.
Dunno if this is a good comparison Malc. Most Brits don't have a bidet or feel comfortable with using a tabo or similar, so toilet paper is perceived as a "necessity" (however many billions of people get by today or got by historically without it, including Brits from just a few generations back). .
I'm going to wipe my arse on the Telegraph and then post it to Laurence Fox.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
According to my father we’re managing the quarantine/isolation and tracing much better.
We’re actually keeping people quarantined/isolated rather than the Italian approach which is to tell people to quarantine/isolate them then letting do whatever they like.
There was a lady on CH4 news last night who lives in the affected party of Italy and basically said loads of people are still totally ignoring the restrictions and no punishment for doing so. They see it as optional. Despite shopping centres being closed, kids still meeting up to hang out in the car parks etc.
Have to say I don’t take much notice of the Royal family’s goings on, and never had an opinion on Meghan Markle one way or the other. But seeing this clip of her with the young boy from Robert Clack in Dagenham on Saturday makes me think it is a real opportunity missed for the Royal Family to have a black princess. It could have given Black people a feeling of having a stake in the country, skin in the game, and bring us closer together, which I guess is what the RF are for.There is another bit where he winks as he hugs her that I can’t find, it really is great.
The Markle sparkle. It is a loss.
If black people can only identify with black people and white people only with white people then we’ve got absolutely nowhere in the last 50 years.
The key fact is that Markle brings black identification with a historically very different and arguably white institution. She's providing something distinctive, while sharing something with the whole. This is the only way genuine multiculturalism can work - not oppressive and fearful assimilation, or polarised identity politics.
I’m not sure the monarchy had any real problem with black identification prior to the arrival of Markle, which was barely three years ago.
It’s as if the decades of work the Queen and her family (including Prince Charles and Diana) had been doing with inner cities, Commonwealth leaders and commonwealth institutions didn’t matter.
I'm not sure I really agree there. I remember at the wedding of William and Kate, there seemed barely a black face to be seen in the crowds, which I remember David Starkey, of all people, commenting on.
The Queen has been a strong advocate of a kind of moderate multiculturalism for years - her christmas broadcasts have included footage of minority traditions and mention of minorities on several recent years now, for instance, and I think the enthusiasm for Markle that she had illustrates her understanding of adapting continuing symbolism - that's the been the key to her success.
There are two separate issues though - one is that Markle's presence in itself has been symbolically beneficial, but the other is the content of her public interventions. There have been times which she's risked over-emphasising particular topics, and so unintentionally straying into a kind of polarising identity politics arena, rather than a consensualising one, like Prince William did with his speech about black invisibility at the BAFTA's. On balance, though, I think she's been a good thing, and her departure is the country's loss.
Gordon Brown did mismanage the economy. Are you a deficit denier still? Its hard to imagine they still exist, its like meeting a climate change denier.
They are easy to find. Wait for the budget, look for the current UK PM, Chancellor and cabinet.
The current UK, PM and Cabinet should be expected to increase the deficit in a downturn. The problem of Brown's mismanagement isn't that the deficit swelled during the downturn - it is that he blew the surplus and turned it into a maxed out deficit BEFORE the downturn.
If it was maxed out then it could not have increased but it did so it wasn't. The credit card analogy is nonsensical.
The Labour approach was to keep public debt level during a boom and explode it during the bust. The right approach is to reduce it during a boom and explode it during the bust.
But their real sin was not public debt but private debt. They allowed it to increase faster than any other major economy in the decade leading up to the GFC.
Interesting point from that article is that the US has 10 times as many ICU beds per capita as the UK, yet their fatality rate is currently 4% of confirmed cases.
Is the US issue that they have the facilities but you can only access them if you have insurance?
Not very likely to be linked to ICU beds.
Total COVID-19 cases in UK are less than 6% of total of ICU beds.
In Germany the equivalent number is approx 4-5%.
Neither country is anywhere near the limit.
That may change. Or it may not. At the moment it is speculation.
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
We're punishing ourselves. The UK government isn't interested in a great deal with the EU if it gets in the way of dogma. See EASA, rejection of terms in the Northern Ireland Protocol, United Patent Court, Erasmus, EAW, GDPR, permanent agreement on any aspect of the level playing field, refusal to engage with anyone in the UK that actually trades to find out what they want/need etc etc etc.
Part of the explanation for China getting on top of this: (Guardian) Getting into one’s apartment compound or workplace requires scanning a QR code, writing down one’s name and ID number, temperature and recent travel history. Telecom operators track people’s movements while social media platforms like WeChat and Weibo have hotlines for people to report others who may be sick. Some cities are offering people rewards for informing on sick neighbours.
Chinese companies are meanwhile rolling out facial recognition technology that can detect elevated temperatures in a crowd or flag citizens not wearing a face mask. A range of apps use the personal health information of citizens to alert others of their proximity to infected patients or whether they have been in close contact.
State authorities, in addition to locking down entire cities, have implemented a myriad of security measures in the name of containing the coronavirus outbreak. From top officials to local community workers, those enforcing the rules repeat the same refrain: this is an “extraordinary time” feichang shiqi, requiring extraordinary measures...
As I said in the previous thread, both Singapore and S Korea (though clearly far less oppressive) have similar systems in operation.
I note the number of declared cases in Italy now exceeds that in ROK.
But Taiwan's a functioning democracy and has reportedly dealt with it well. It has fewer cases per capita than the UK. That's quite impressive given its location.
What I find more than a bit odd is that SK's rate is 3x that of China. Makes me wonder yet again about their numbers outside Hubei.
The other things I find troubling is that the number of "closed" cases ending in death has been stuck at 6% for 2 weeks now. It really should have fallen as more "minor" infections were discovered. Second, the table shows that the percentage at critical is 13% suggesting a massive health need. That seems to be a higher figure than our working assumptions.
Yebbut rural_voter was talking about Taiwan, not SK.
Part of the explanation for China getting on top of this: (Guardian) Getting into one’s apartment compound or workplace requires scanning a QR code, writing down one’s name and ID number, temperature and recent travel history. Telecom operators track people’s movements while social media platforms like WeChat and Weibo have hotlines for people to report others who may be sick. Some cities are offering people rewards for informing on sick neighbours.
Chinese companies are meanwhile rolling out facial recognition technology that can detect elevated temperatures in a crowd or flag citizens not wearing a face mask. A range of apps use the personal health information of citizens to alert others of their proximity to infected patients or whether they have been in close contact.
State authorities, in addition to locking down entire cities, have implemented a myriad of security measures in the name of containing the coronavirus outbreak. From top officials to local community workers, those enforcing the rules repeat the same refrain: this is an “extraordinary time” feichang shiqi, requiring extraordinary measures...
As I said in the previous thread, both Singapore and S Korea (though clearly far less oppressive) have similar systems in operation.
I note the number of declared cases in Italy now exceeds that in ROK.
But Taiwan's a functioning democracy and has reportedly dealt with it well. It has fewer cases per capita than the UK. That's quite impressive given its location.
What I find more than a bit odd is that SK's rate is 3x that of China. Makes me wonder yet again about their numbers outside Hubei.
The other things I find troubling is that the number of "closed" cases ending in death has been stuck at 6% for 2 weeks now. It really should have fallen as more "minor" infections were discovered. Second, the table shows that the percentage at critical is 13% suggesting a massive health need. That seems to be a higher figure than our working assumptions.
Yebbut rural_voter was talking about Taiwan, not SK.
Sorry to be vulgar and political, but does Coronavirus mean we'll now get a great trade deal from the EU? I can't see anyone in the EU now taking the attitude of punishing the UK even if it means hurting the EU a bit.
We're punishing ourselves. The UK government isn't interested in a great deal with the EU if it gets in the way of dogma. See EASA, rejection of terms in the Northern Ireland Protocol, United Patent Court, Erasmus, EAW, GDPR, permanent agreement on any aspect of the level playing field, refusal to engage with anyone in the UK that actually trades to find out what they want/need etc etc etc.
I've only skimmed it, so can't speak for it's accuracy in general, but I rate the author (I can read her articles in my field without tearing my hair out, which is not true of most news outlets)
I think that if someone is grieving for their dead Uncle Bob it's not much solace to them if a Minister argues that if they'd been in Italy they would have had it worse and their Aunt Alice would have died too.
This is not to say that I expect the government to be blamed, but I don't think relative performance will be the determining factor.
Britain might arguably have been better prepared for WWII than France, but it didn't do Chamberlain much good.
We were better prepared than France but the Frogs weren't our rivals. We weren't as prepared as the Nazis.
People die every day of every year. I'm hopeful my octagenarian and nonagenarian grandparents survive this, but accept that morbidity is an issue for everyone ultimately.
The French aren't our rivals this time either. The virus is.
My concern is that in delaying further measures to protect the economy from undue stress, Boris will end up exposing the NHS to stress that it cannot manage without there being excess deaths due to lack of ICU capacity, trained staff and equipment.
We'll see. Perhaps his timing will be optimal. I certainly hope so.
Ultimately that’s the heart of the decision he needs to make. Unknown risk vs certain economic damage
No mystery, they will have quality practices and quality health care facilities with enough capacity to handle emergencies.
No, that’s bollocks. France has one of the best-funded health systems in the world, has a very similar number of cases to Germany, yet France has a fairly high death rate.
The solution to the no-deaths-in-Germany mystery lies elsewhere
Could just be a matter of random dumb luck and time so far.
Overwhelming majority of Germany's cases are less than a week old so the deaths may just have not occurred yet, plus when you're talking in low digits still in France, Germany or the UK then individual semi-random variance can be overblown.
He needs to be winning Washington State by about 30 points to have a sniff I think. Nate's 1% for Sanders maj and at most 4% chance (24-1) feels more correct.
Interesting point from that article is that the US has 10 times as many ICU beds per capita as the UK, yet their fatality rate is currently 4% of confirmed cases.
Is the US issue that they have the facilities but you can only access them if you have insurance?
The US is barely testing, so the mortality rate can not be believed.
I would be more confident in the UK response if I knew about the non-populist, science-based measures the UK government is taking, which the Italians haven't.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
That quote sounds exactly like Cummings. He clearly sees this as a test of his approach.
It certainly shows Cummings influence. "Science-based" is a soundbite continually used by the Johnson government, which is nevertheless the most ideological administration in all of UK history.
It's so cool that your view of the administration as ideologically based rather than science based, is, itself, ideologically based.
I definitely have an empirical basis for saying this government is ideologically driven to an unusual degree. See my other post on its approach to negotiations with the EU. Also note this government never comes up with a cause and effect justification for what it does: we do this in this way to achieve such and such a desirable outcome. "Get Brexit done" doesn't count.
... He needs to be winning Washington State by about 30 points to have a sniff I think. Nate's 1% for Sanders maj and at most 4% chance (24-1) feels more correct.
So Sanders looks a lay at 13.0 right now.
Not sure about that - that 13.0 reflects not current polling, but the non-negligible risk that the Biden campaign might self-destruct.
Comments
On 24th February Italy hit the 100 cases mark. The UK passed 100 on 6th March that's 11 days later.
Note these reported results appear not to be from a blinded trial, though the Chinese are now said to be recruiting for one. Published clinical trial results from China should be valid.
Had the government been running a small surplus (as the Tories were running when the UK had last had a recession) then the resulting correction would have been manageable. Unfortunately Brown thought he'd abolished boom and bust.
Any analogy between the Uk and Italy is necessarily a bit rough and ready.
Say 2 weeks, then.
But, that is 2 weeks that the Government can really use, if they are competent.
Johnson is chairing his weekly crisis meeting today so no doubt we'll get an update.
https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1236739529303830530
Now the next inevitable downturn is here its time for it to increase again, Keynesian economics, the left used to believe in that before Brown abolished boom and bust and transformed a surplus into a massive deficit prior to a downturn.
We’re actually keeping people quarantined/isolated rather than the Italian approach which is to tell people to quarantine/isolate them then letting do whatever they like.
And yes, it's a MAb, so not cheap to produce.
My concern is that in delaying further measures to protect the economy from undue stress, Boris will end up exposing the NHS to stress that it cannot manage without there being excess deaths due to lack of ICU capacity, trained staff and equipment.
We'll see. Perhaps his timing will be optimal. I certainly hope so.
Clearly the message about how to handle this is not getting through to the NHS helpline people - or at least not all of them. Our local practice had a woman turn up last week with suspected Covid-19 having just returned from one of the hot spots. She had phoned 111, described her symptoms and recent travel and was advised to go to her GP. NHS Direct then contacted the GP to tell them she was on her way in and to be prepared to receive her.
They managed to head her off in the car park and send her home to be dealt with remotely and then had to contact NHS Direct to tell them not to be so bloody stupid as they had risked having the whole GP Surgery shut down.
No system is perfect, and overburdened systems don't perform at their best.
Then in 5 years with no downturn Brown smashed the surplus to pieces and maxed out the deficit. Why?
Come for law, stay for love
https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/exclusive-firms-website-hacked-advertise-busty-russian-brides
You're in a cheerful mood this morning.
"Germany has approximately four times as many ICU beds per capita as the UK"
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/03/icu-doctor-nhs-coronavirus-pandemic-hospitals
It is also something most people only keep a supply for a week or two in normal circumstances, and it's only possible to stretch such a supply out a little further by using it more frugally. It is a pretty rapidly depleted resource. On the other hand extra stocks of loo roll are relatively cheap, albeit space-consuming, and have a very long life. You're likely to get through your stock eventually so it isn't wasteful to hold extra except in the economic sense that you're holding extra inventory instead of some asset with a better financial return (and at current interest rates and stock market performance, and bearing in mind the low cost of a couple of weeks of loo roll, this is not a persuasive argument against stocking up).
Running short of loo roll and being unable to stock up, due to panic buying, economic collapse or quarantine arrangements restricting transport or shopping, would be regarded by most people as disastrous. So if there is a realistic risk of any of those happening, it becomes rational to purchase extra bog roll as part of your regular shop. Moreover the pressure on toilet paper is likely to be especially severe because almost everyone uses it and few substitutes are available (dried pasta, rice, porridge oats etc don't feature so universally in everyone's purchasing habits and there would be ready alternatives if one ran out) and you also know everyone else can see the benefits (and relatively few added costs) of holding extra at a time of uncertainty. So why not go for it and stick a couple of extra packets in your trolley at your next shop, not just one more for luck? Buying four 24-packs instead of one likely leaves you with 100+ at home if you already had some in stock. Ah, but then you know everyone else will be thinking that too, so best get your purchase in first...
There's thus a very fine line between "prudential" and "panic" buying. In times of uncertainty, as soon as there's a risk of panic buying, it becomes rational to panic buy yourself. Rather like how bank runs work. Arguably selfish and bad for the operation of the overall system, but not idiotic even if you think the main underlying risk comes from the behaviour of others and the coronavirus itself is unlikely to imminently disrupt logistical systems.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1236634209516752896
Boris Johnson has recommended frequent handwashing but has also been shaking hands with many people at a sporting event. Surely this is contradictory behaviour and maybe there is politics behind it. The government should look at what other countries are doing that is working, if we are not doing the same things, before the situation gets much worse and take the required action.
Basically exacerbating the problems we see already. Probably not causing any new ones specifically.
https://covid19japan.com/#chart-legend-container
If this works here it should work for any other developed country, although I guess Britain and the US will wait until a couple of hundred of their people have died before they copy it, after which you'll need a few more weeks before you see the effect.
I've only skimmed it, so can't speak for it's accuracy in general, but I rate the author (I can read her articles in my field without tearing my hair out, which is not true of most news outlets)
Is the US issue that they have the facilities but you can only access them if you have insurance?
There has been much discussion about vaccines, but those won't be available before at least a year, maybe more. However, research on using existing anti-virals is also proceeding, and since these are already licensed as safe to use, can be deployed much more quickly, if we're lucky that they prove to be effective. Fingers crossed on that one, it's probably the best hope of limiting this scourge.
For example the refusal to allow the U.K. to be part of Euratom, Galileo or the pandemic warning system unless we accept free movement of people.
In a rational world people could come up with a structure that would allow collaboration where it makes sense. But they have decided that free movement is a matter of principle.
It’s as if the decades of work the Queen and her family (including Prince Charles and Diana) had been doing with inner cities, Commonwealth leaders and commonwealth institutions didn’t matter.
It’s why we’ve got to the state we have.
One of the reasons the Covid-19 crisis was so damaging to Britain - longer and deeper than almost every other country in the developed world - was because the Conservatives had so starved the NHS of cash prior to the crisis. They didn't cause the crash but he made sure the UK suffered more than many others and for longer than was necessary.
https://twitter.com/Biotech2050/status/1236758010820771840
I doubt they are systematically testing the recently deceased either so we don't really know how many have died from it in Japan.
- Ask people to work from home where practical
- Ask people to cancel events where practical, run sporting events without spectators etc
- Ask people to stay away from crowds, they spontaneously stayed at home a lot
- Close schools
- Handwashing etc etc
The thing about this is that it doesn't particularly destroy the economy; Everything is still working, and working from home is probably more productive for a lot of people. So it's not like China where they had to do radical things that aren't compatible with a free society.
But of course the difference between yours and mine is that mine is a matter of historic fact whereas yours is currently a bit of speculative fiction.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
What I find more than a bit odd is that SK's rate is 3x that of China. Makes me wonder yet again about their numbers outside Hubei.
The other things I find troubling is that the number of "closed" cases ending in death has been stuck at 6% for 2 weeks now. It really should have fallen as more "minor" infections were discovered. Second, the table shows that the percentage at critical is 13% suggesting a massive health need. That seems to be a higher figure than our working assumptions.
The Queen has been a strong advocate of a kind of moderate multiculturalism for years - her christmas broadcasts have included footage of minority traditions and mention of minorities on several recent years now, for instance, and I think the enthusiasm for Markle that she had illustrates her understanding of adapting continuing symbolism - that's the been the key to her success.
There are two separate issues though - one is that Markle's presence in itself has been symbolically beneficial, but the other is the content of her public interventions. There have been times which she's risked over-emphasising particular topics, and so unintentionally straying into a kind of polarising identity politics arena, rather than a consensualising one, like Prince William did with his speech about black invisibility at the BAFTA's. On balance, though, I think she's been a good thing, and her departure is the country's loss.
But their real sin was not public debt but private debt. They allowed it to increase faster than any other major economy in the decade leading up to the GFC.
Total COVID-19 cases in UK are less than 6% of total of ICU beds.
In Germany the equivalent number is approx 4-5%.
Neither country is anywhere near the limit.
That may change. Or it may not. At the moment it is speculation.
If he gets it wrong he will be correctly punished
Overwhelming majority of Germany's cases are less than a week old so the deaths may just have not occurred yet, plus when you're talking in low digits still in France, Germany or the UK then individual semi-random variance can be overblown.
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1236489437808377857
He needs to be winning Washington State by about 30 points to have a sniff I think.
Nate's 1% for Sanders maj and at most 4% chance (24-1) feels more correct.
So Sanders looks a lay at 13.0 right now.