Hmm. I do recall some of us suggesting Carney's panic cut after the referendum and refusal to increase rates might just diminish room for manoeuvre when the next problem came along.
Pound up a smidge to $1.17.
It was around $1.4-1.5 for a while, then settled at $1.3ish for a long time after the referendum.
Hmm. I do recall some of us suggesting Carney's panic cut after the referendum and refusal to increase rates might just diminish room for manoeuvre when the next problem came along.
Pound up a smidge to $1.17.
It was around $1.4-1.5 for a while, then settled at $1.3ish for a long time after the referendum.
Don't worry, there are a lot of negative numbers they can use.
Not true. Slumps are a net bad for commercial law firms. In 2008/9 I saw a net drop of 33% in my profit share. I'd expect this to have severe effects on law firms this time too.
I was thinking there could be some big legal arguments after all this is over, but if there are no businesses left to argue about it, then perhaps not.
Venice no propellers churning up the silt in canals, makes fish visible.
I suppose Ed Davey will be enjoying Layla Moran's woke look at me stupidity. If the Lib Dems have any sense keep her away from leadership.
From her Twitter a/c
Farage and Trump engaging in racial hatred by ‘pointing out’ the virus ‘started in China’. You know what else ‘started in China’? The fleet that discovered America in 1492.
She thinks Columbus was Chinese?
She is wrong. The Chinese sailor Zhou Man discovered the west coast of America in the 1420s. See Gavin Menzies, 1421 - The Year China discovered the World.
No Indyref this year. I wonder if the price of oil has anything to do with it.
No - N Sea revenues were holed below the waterline by Osborne's 2011 tax grab and subsequent tax allowances for taking facilities out of production for modernisation.
holed certainly, but now the hole has got even bigger
You don't think there are more obvious reasons why launching a referendum campaign this year is a non-starter?
No Indyref this year. I wonder if the price of oil has anything to do with it.
No - N Sea revenues were holed below the waterline by Osborne's 2011 tax grab and subsequent tax allowances for taking facilities out of production for modernisation.
holed certainly, but now the hole has got even bigger
You don't think there are more obvious reasons why launching a referendum campaign this year is a non-starter?
The SNP is in crisis ? Hamish McWeinstein ? Sturgeon knows she'll lose ?
Co-op to offer jobs to hospitality workers The Co-op is to create 5,000 store-based posts in a bid to provide temporary employment for hospitality workers who have lost their jobs amid the coronavirus crisis, the company announced.--
Death toll from coronavirus in England rises to 128 as another 29 patients die
The NHS has announced that a further 29 people who tested positive for coronavirus in England have died, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in England to 128. It says the patients were aged between 47 and 96 years old and had underlying health conditions.
I think I might have to stop using that Sion Simon piece as the apotheosis of bad political predictions, this piece by Dan Hannan from last month has raised the bar.
Alarmism, doom-mongering, panic – and the coronavirus. We are nowhere near a 1919-style catastrophe.
That reflects the fact that the UK is a more divided society. The bulk of it based on party divisions and maybe divisions on other issues. If I read the Italina poll correctly the big jump has come recently as the situation got much worse.
I agree.
It cuts both ways of course. While there are people who will always say the government is doing badly on any issue, there are others who will support them even when they are clearly screwing things up.
I was mostly defending the government's approach among my friends and family until the phrase "herd immunity" came out. That was such obvious drivel that I completely lost faith in them and started using the Irish government (I've been close to the Irish border lately) as my source of official advice. Obviously the UK government's moved on from that now, but the slapstick way in which the school closure was announced betrays a lack of planning over the last month or two, and is contributing to the anxiety.
So if anything I think the polarisation is boosting the government's figures here.
Death toll from coronavirus in England rises to 128 as another 29 patients die
The NHS has announced that a further 29 people who tested positive for coronavirus in England have died, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in England to 128. It says the patients were aged between 47 and 96 years old and had underlying health conditions.
47 is a bit on the errrrh the young side. I know that the guy who was 45 who died the other day have MND, but still.
It is a big Tory lead. But I can see it shrinking rapidly as the crisis deepens and the public get to see lots of Starmer. He will be striking just the right note of constructive yet challenging. And people are going to like his shrewd and measured demeanor at a time like this. He has a reassuring presence that the charismatic, edgy Johnson does not. Johnson makes you laugh or cry, often simultaneously. Starmer makes you feel safe.
Parliament will be closed and we'll never hear from him until it's all over.
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
Most US airlines seem to spend half their time in Chapter 11.
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
That's measures for the long-term. Britain in particular has a disproportionately large precariat, who need some form of action very quickly.
The Labour MP Kate Osamor has been ordered to apologise by the Commons standards committee after it found that she broke parliamentary rules by using Commons notepaper to write a character reference for her son before he was sentenced in court for a drugs offence. The committee said in a report (pdf) that there was nothing wrong with Osamor supplying the reference, but that the use of Commons stationery implied her letter carried the authority of the house. But it was a relatively minor breach of rules, the committee suggested.
The committee also said Osamor broke the code of conduct by threatening a journalist who came to her house, and by then at first refusing to respond to contact from the parliamentary commissioner for standards.
In its report the committee said:
Ms Osamor resigned from the opposition front bench as a result of these events, so she has paid a price for her behaviour in terms of her career.
We recommend that Ms Osamor should apologise to the house for her breaches of the code of conduct, by means of a letter to the committee which we will publish on our website. We add that if Ms Osamor were to commit any further similar breaches of the code, we would take a very serious view of the matter.
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
The problem is a lot of things like airlines don't own the assets. They're leased.
There should be a utter-rethink of rent for commerical properties though. I can't understand the requests for some rentals which then lead to the proprty becoming empty, and generating no income at all.
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
Consequence of bankruptcy very often is not for the bankrupt but for the suppliers. Seem to recall a football club folding, being reborn and keeping it's League status, and place, but paying it's suppliers something ludicrous like 10p in the £. Meant they went to the wall as well, with consequent opprobrium on the directors etc. Opprobium not shared by the football club.
It is a big Tory lead. But I can see it shrinking rapidly as the crisis deepens and the public get to see lots of Starmer. He will be striking just the right note of constructive yet challenging. And people are going to like his shrewd and measured demeanor at a time like this. He has a reassuring presence that the charismatic, edgy Johnson does not. Johnson makes you laugh or cry, often simultaneously. Starmer makes you feel safe.
It would be interesting to see a rough estimate of what proportion of people are working normally.
Everyone's attention is understandably directed upon people we can see - ie people in consumer facing businesses - eg bars, restaurants, shops, hotels etc.
But what about things like construction? eg Is everyone working normally on HS2 building sites today?
Obviously there are many areas where everyone (unless off sick) is working normally - eg NHS, police, military etc. And presumably nobody in the public sector will be laid off - eg even when schools close, teachers will still be paid.
So what does anyone think an overall rough estimate would be?
Surely we need to know this when thinking how much the Treasury needs to do (of course also noting that the situation may get much worse).
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
That's measures for the long-term. Britain has a disproportionately large precariat, who need some form of action very quickly.
If the businesses restart quickly, they get their old, or similar jobs back. In the meantime they need short term benefits.
The question is who should take the financial hit, the shareholder or the taxpayer? Recognising that I am both myself.
Even I support Johnson at the moment, not because he's the PM we need- he isn't - but because he's the PM we've got. We must support him to get through this thing, while challenging him to raise his game.
You gotta laugh. Usual suspects on pb.com going into meltdown about the Govt. as the Tories poll 52%, You'd never guess from the tame brains on here that outside their bubble, the Govt. was seeing post-Falkland highs....
It would be interesting to see a rough estimate of what proportion of people are working normally.
Everyone's attention is understandably directed upon people we can see - ie people in consumer facing businesses - eg bars, restaurants, shops, hotels etc.
But what about things like construction? eg Is everyone working normally on HS2 building sites today?
Obviously there are many areas where everyone (unless off sick) is working normally - eg NHS, police, military etc. And presumably nobody in the public sector will be laid off - eg even when schools close, teachers will still be paid.
So what does anyone think an overall rough estimate would be?
Surely we need to know this when thinking how much the Treasury needs to do (of course also noting that the situation may get much worse).
anecdote but my board game group of 10 that meets once a week now has gone from 10 employed to 4 in the last 2 weeks
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
That's measures for the long-term. Britain has a disproportionately large precariat, who need some form of action very quickly.
If the businesses restart quickly, they get their old, or similar jobs back. In the meantime they need short term benefits.
The question is who should take the financial hit, the shareholder or the taxpayer? Recognising that I am both myself.
The problem is, we have no timescale. If the shutdown continues, many of those businesses may go bust and comparable ones may not replace them. This is why Trump and the Danes, for instance, are already moving to income replacement measures. The risks are very great.
Perhaps what we need economically is not massive government spending, but better bankruptcy law?
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
That's measures for the long-term. Britain has a disproportionately large precariat, who need some form of action very quickly.
If the businesses restart quickly, they get their old, or similar jobs back. In the meantime they need short term benefits.
The question is who should take the financial hit, the shareholder or the taxpayer? Recognising that I am both myself.
The problem is, we have no timescale. If the shutdown continues, many of those businesses may go bust and comparable ones may not replace them. This is why Trump and the Danes, for instance, are already moving to income replacement measures. The risks are very great.
In addition will businesses use the opportunity to get rid of costly staff and replace with cheaper or younger staff....just because a business rehires doesnt mean they will take on the same people
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
Makes the long term tip on Hamilton beating Schumacher's total win record even likelier to come off.
I imagine the bets I made on this season will all be voided, but we'll see. I had a couple that look like they'd be green, but the situation is unusual, it's fair to say.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
It's March. It's not unusual for lots of people to have a sniffle at this time of year, but now they don't know whether it's a deadly new Coronavirus, a normal one, or a rhinovirus, or even hayfever. So your 10-20% figure could be mainly people carrying relatively harmless viruses. We just don't know.
Fairly obviously we care more about our own lives and our families, than of risks to people we never meet. COVID19 may kill me, but climate change may kill a Mozambique farmer.
We're also fatigued by the constant predictions of the end of the world from the likes of the extinction rebellion. Coronavirus is actually delivering.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Quickly but not necessarily painfully if the fatality and severity statistics are grossly wrong because the denominator is way out.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Quickly but not necessarily painfully if the fatality and severity statistics are grossly wrong because the denominator is way out.
Good point. I hope you are correct. But a factor of a thousand out would be quite something. The boffins are thinking 10-20x.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
It's March. It's not unusual for lots of people to have a sniffle at this time of year, but now they don't know whether it's a deadly new Coronavirus, a normal one, or a rhinovirus, or even hayfever. So your 10-20% figure could be mainly people carrying relatively harmless viruses. We just don't know.
You're right. We just don't know, and that's the point. We don't know the denominator because we are not testing the general population.
Maybe just me, but I feel that the orange slimeblob looks ever more old, slow, tired and spent each time they roll him out there with his "tremendous success" bullshit.
Fairly obviously we care more about our own lives and our families, than of risks to people we never meet. COVID19 may kill me, but climate change may kill a Mozambique farmer.
Pollution is more likely to kill you than Covid-19 I’d say, &the people dying from Covid-19 may well only be suffering from underlying problems because of pollution
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
It's March. It's not unusual for lots of people to have a sniffle at this time of year, but now they don't know whether it's a deadly new Coronavirus, a normal one, or a rhinovirus, or even hayfever. So your 10-20% figure could be mainly people carrying relatively harmless viruses. We just don't know.
You're right. We just don't know, and that's the point. We don't know the denominator because we are not testing the general population.
World-o-meter is showing 33 new deaths and only 66 new detected cases. That looks remarkable.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
Unquestionably a lot of people are going to be learning home-working skills that they never knew they had, or had before - getting used to the software, getting over the initial collective awkwardness and unfamiliarity that many people initially feel in the group meetings, and most importantly getting over the idea that it's always second best, or less socially prestigious.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Of my employees in London, out of nine, one has been diagnosed with it (as his wife), and another is exhibiting the symptoms and is self isolating at home. (But may well never get tested.)
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
My big business idea, if I had the money, would be to buy up British Legions and Working Mans clubs, give them a makeover and remarket as private members clubs. If this goes on for long, People may have gone off the idea of mixing with strangers in large, loud boozers
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Of my employees in London, out of nine, one has been diagnosed with it (as his wife), and another is exhibiting the symptoms and is self isolating at home. (But may well never get tested.)
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
Hope it's over soon because I am already getting cabin fever.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
If nothing else businesses need to be ready for future outbreaks over the next couple of years until there is a vaccine. Once you have bought the kit, paid for the systems, and scaled it up to work with a large fraction of your employees at home, are you going to chuck it away and revert to the way you operated before? No, for at lot of businesses this will be a step change.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Of my employees in London, out of nine, one has been diagnosed with it (as his wife), and another is exhibiting the symptoms and is self isolating at home. (But may well never get tested.)
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
I think to a very large extent, those remotely showing symptoms within the band of possibles are now staying isolated. Anecdotally, are people still coming across folks out there in public who are coughing?
We're also fatigued by the constant predictions of the end of the world from the likes of the extinction rebellion. Coronavirus is actually delivering.
"fatigued by the constant predictions of the end of the world" Oh dear diddums.
Fairly obviously we care more about our own lives and our families, than of risks to people we never meet. COVID19 may kill me, but climate change may kill a Mozambique farmer.
Also COVID19 will be over in months, if it was going to be permanent we'd be looking at mitigation rather than shut downs.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
Unquestionably a lot of people are going to be learning home-working skills that they never knew they had, or had before - getting used to the software, getting over the initial collective awkwardness and unfamiliarity that many people initially feel in the group meetings, and most importantly getting over the idea that it's always second best, or less socially prestigious.
If it wasn't for the virus I wouldn't be getting home until after 9 this evening. Instead I'm in a Teams meeting and, er, multitasking.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
It's great till the bills roll in and we discover the cost for millions of ordinary folk.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Of my employees in London, out of nine, one has been diagnosed with it (as his wife), and another is exhibiting the symptoms and is self isolating at home. (But may well never get tested.)
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
Hope it's over soon because I am already getting cabin fever.
Likewise. Went for a long walk this afternoon in the country. Just couldn’t stay in the house any longer.
Concerning since London has a younger population than most places in England.
I suspect that a much larger % of London's population is infected than the rest of the country because Londoner's live, travel and work much closer together. So you should expect a larger proportion of cases and deaths.
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
If 10-20% of Londoners have it already this is going to be over quite quickly, and quite painfully!
Of my employees in London, out of nine, one has been diagnosed with it (as his wife), and another is exhibiting the symptoms and is self isolating at home. (But may well never get tested.)
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
I think to a very large extent, those remotely showing symptoms within the band of possibles are now staying isolated. Anecdotally, are people still coming across folks out there in public who are coughing?
When I was in the supermarket earlier this week I noticed a few coughs. Probably no more than you'd normally hear but now every time someone coughs you pick it up immediately rather than ignoring it.
Pollution expert on BBC says levels in New York City are the lowest she's ever seen.
It's fascinating - the collapse in NO2 emissions over China, the improvements in the Venice lagoon. I even think London's air quality might improve with time.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
I definitely think we will see a massive increase in working from home, which can only be a good thing when it comes to pollution from vehicles in big cities.
Unquestionably a lot of people are going to be learning home-working skills that they never knew they had, or had before - getting used to the software, getting over the initial collective awkwardness and unfamiliarity that many people initially feel in the group meetings, and most importantly getting over the idea that it's always second best, or less socially prestigious.
Son's children, ages 14, 12 and 6 (yes, I know), have been sent home as school is closed, but he and his wife are expected to ensure that they log onto their ;laptops, Idas or whatever punctually each morning and do the school work the school have sent her. Different classes every so often, just like school. It's not too bad with the elder two but of course the youngest needs watching and, often, help from Mum or Dad. And Mum's around, but has a house to run, and dad's working from home. It's not as easy as it sounds.
Comments
Pound up a smidge to $1.17.
It was around $1.4-1.5 for a while, then settled at $1.3ish for a long time after the referendum.
Shall I ask them if they’d prefer me to take a suitcase full of cash to their door?
Looked really interesting, but checking online it seems like it's a bogus claim.
The Co-op is to create 5,000 store-based posts in a bid to provide temporary employment for hospitality workers who have lost their jobs amid the coronavirus crisis, the company announced.--
The NHS has announced that a further 29 people who tested positive for coronavirus in England have died, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in England to 128. It says the patients were aged between 47 and 96 years old and had underlying health conditions.
https://reaction.life/britain-looks-like-brexit/
What a prat he is.
Smaller rise in England?
It cuts both ways of course. While there are people who will always say the government is doing badly on any issue, there are others who will support them even when they are clearly screwing things up.
I was mostly defending the government's approach among my friends and family until the phrase "herd immunity" came out. That was such obvious drivel that I completely lost faith in them and started using the Irish government (I've been close to the Irish border lately) as my source of official advice. Obviously the UK government's moved on from that now, but the slapstick way in which the school closure was announced betrays a lack of planning over the last month or two, and is contributing to the anxiety.
So if anything I think the polarisation is boosting the government's figures here.
12 in rest of England.
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1240652521418493952
If airlines, hotels, restaurants go bust, the physical facilities and personnel and skills still exist. Sure, shareholders and owners take a massive hit, but if not barred from owning another business, can restart pronto under new ownership.
The economic effects would be big, but in the USA, being a bankrupt seems to be a temporary state rather than a terminal event. Hasn't Trump himself sometimes been in section 11?
The committee also said Osamor broke the code of conduct by threatening a journalist who came to her house, and by then at first refusing to respond to contact from the parliamentary commissioner for standards.
In its report the committee said:
Ms Osamor resigned from the opposition front bench as a result of these events, so she has paid a price for her behaviour in terms of her career.
We recommend that Ms Osamor should apologise to the house for her breaches of the code of conduct, by means of a letter to the committee which we will publish on our website. We add that if Ms Osamor were to commit any further similar breaches of the code, we would take a very serious view of the matter.
There should be a utter-rethink of rent for commerical properties though. I can't understand the requests for some rentals which then lead to the proprty becoming empty, and generating no income at all.
Meant they went to the wall as well, with consequent opprobrium on the directors etc. Opprobium not shared by the football club.
Everyone's attention is understandably directed upon people we can see - ie people in consumer facing businesses - eg bars, restaurants, shops, hotels etc.
But what about things like construction? eg Is everyone working normally on HS2 building sites today?
Obviously there are many areas where everyone (unless off sick) is working normally - eg NHS, police, military etc. And presumably nobody in the public sector will be laid off - eg even when schools close, teachers will still be paid.
So what does anyone think an overall rough estimate would be?
Surely we need to know this when thinking how much the Treasury needs to do (of course also noting that the situation may get much worse).
The question is who should take the financial hit, the shareholder or the taxpayer? Recognising that I am both myself.
And nobody wants to see that.
Corbyn's going but not yet gone, and the pandemic's underway but nowhere near resolved.
"Formula 1 bosses have agreed to delay the planned 2021 rules until 2022 and to work to squeeze as many races into this season as possible."
Based on what I hear locally of sicknesses and self isolation as many as 10% - 20% could already have the infection compared with reported cases of 0.01% in London [936 out of a population of 9,000,000].
This makes an enormous difference to the fatality rate. Instead of 4% it could be 0.4% or even 0.04% - similar to seasonal flu. It could also explain the reduction of cases and deaths in China. They almost all already have it.
If this is the case, the cost of not having an adequate contingency plan for mass testing will be measured in trillions in terms of loss economic output around the world. This could all be a massive over reaction. On this basis I have started buying equities.
Makes the long term tip on Hamilton beating Schumacher's total win record even likelier to come off.
I imagine the bets I made on this season will all be voided, but we'll see. I had a couple that look like they'd be green, but the situation is unusual, it's fair to say.
Shutdowns take a while to work.
So your 10-20% figure could be mainly people carrying relatively harmless viruses. We just don't know.
COVID19 may kill me, but climate change may kill a Mozambique farmer.
We're also fatigued by the constant predictions of the end of the world from the likes of the extinction rebellion. Coronavirus is actually delivering.
All little straws in the wind that perhaps, just perhaps, some might ask whether the headlong rush to economic growth is really worth the price to our environment and the air we breathe.
Wedding planners about to take a hit.
It might very well be that 10-20% of Londoners do have this. In which case, morbidity rates are going to be less than expected. It will be extremely unpleasant, but at least it will be over with soon.
Oh dear diddums.
https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1240600919085068290