I hear this morning that the government have pushed the button on HS2 this morning.
Sorry, do you mean cancel HS2? (if so, good shout, that money is needed elsewhere)
No, construction has been allowed to start.
The money would not be available elsewhere. The estimated £81 billion is borrowed on the assumption that it will lead to a financial return. So if the railway isn't built, the money doesn't exist.
But it also means that a very large number of people whose jobs were in doubt are now secure as well. Which is not to be sneered at in these times.
Finally, I disagree with RP - commuter trains are not the problem. Freight is. And if we're to start making things in the North of England again as part of a move away from globalisation, we're going to need more railfreight capacity, not less.
It's actually quite easy to have commuter trains ans freight trains on the same network, as - on average - they go at similar speeds. The way we significantly increase capacity is by separating the fast trains from the slow trains.
It's facile to say that freight and commuter trains are the same becasue they go at similar speeds. Freight trians are far longer and more likely to block junctions/platforms etc - they are a bottleneck on capacity. They are also more likely to run (or not) at very short notice which means contingency has to be built into the timetable.
It's pathways that count, not the length of the trains. For those, speed is the key determinant. So a freight train doing 50 and a local service averaging 45 can be kept much the same distance apart. That means the gaps between them can be short. An express doing 125 obviously needs a much longer gap to the train in front unless that is also 125 mph. That means it can take up space for two or even three slower trains.
THat's why HS2 can have as many as 15-18 tph while the current four track WCML doesn't get much over 16. That second figure will be doubled by putting HS2 on meaning a near trebling of capacity.
So, for example, Cannock might get its trains to London back.
I saw on LinkedIn a wonderful deaf lady had designed a mask with a see-through muzzle that allowed people to still lip read.
This is not only a wonderful idea for those who need to communicate with the deaf, but also (provided the material used works as a mask and is not prohibitively expensive) should work for the general public. It will allow identification, and it will allow us to smile at each other.
Oh, and the walking Captain has now blitzed through £5 million.....
Piers Morgan thinks he (the Captain) should be knighted. And you know what, I think it's a good shout. At least some form of gong.
I would love it. If only to see the rictus grin of those time-serving civil servants being on equal terms with an old man walking round his garden. Equality indeed.
The Captain is fast becoming the symbol of our inability to do anything in the face of Covid-19 except cheer on the very mundane. Old bloke walking round and round his garden without falling over - national teasure! Bung him a tenner. And another. Get him to ten million. A hundred million. We've got nothing else to spend it on.
Who gets the money? If the NHS what is it spent on? Whilst a Nobel effort it would be better going to bereaved realatives of NHS workers.
For NHS charities, I think.
That’s fine then just worried about it going into a pot that the government say is bottomless at the moment.
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
If the economic fallout from this is as bad as many of us expect, HS2 will be gone. It’s not especially popular as it is and the pressure on the government to cut spending on non-essentials will be massive.
On the contrary large infrastructure spending is the Roosevelt approach to recovery.
Although it should be noted that wasn't exactly an unmixed success.
Yep, I thought a commonly held view was that the New Deal was necessary to preserve social cohesion and prevent the rise of extremism, but the US economy only recovered properly with the boost given by WWII.
I still don't understand why the UK is unable to do more testing. If we have 50 labs doing this, how come we are only doing 15,000 tests/day?
One lab mentioned in the article can do 2,000 tests/day.
There's clearly some bottleneck, but I haven't yet seen an article that explains it.
My other half works as a geneticist in an NHS lab where PCR machines are used in the diagnosis of genetic cancers. A couple of weeks ago, she was fully expecting that they would be switched to Covid-19 testing. This never happened, and she's somewhat baffled as to the reason why, especially as their regular work is drying up due to the lack of samples arriving.
No criticism, but is she planning to do anything about it? Cock up being more likely than conspiracy, perhaps nobody has thought of it?
She doesn't have the authority to do anything about it, but her boss has tried in vain to offer their lab for Covid-19 testing purposes and is apparently pretty pissed off that they seem to be being overlooked. Obviously, though, there may be bottlenecks elsewhere in the system that he is not aware of - perhaps they already have sufficient testing labs.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
If the economic fallout from this is as bad as many of us expect, HS2 will be gone. It’s not especially popular as it is and the pressure on the government to cut spending on non-essentials will be massive.
On the contrary large infrastructure spending is the Roosevelt approach to recovery.
Although it should be noted that wasn't exactly an unmixed success.
Yep, I thought a commonly held view was that the New Deal was necessary to preserve social cohesion and prevent the rise of extremism, but the US economy only recovered properly with the boost given by WWII.
So we've got that to look forward to.
Don't joke, that might be the reality. In an impoverished world where resources are not evenly allocated, there will be those who try to take more by force.
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
We need work for people in construction and a lot of construction companies have HS2 as their big project for 2021-30. So what would you replace it with given that those people will need work to do.
1) Really fast broadband, everywhere.
2) New factories making PPE.
Fast broadband, everywhere, is already part of a separate, and separately funded, strategy.
And will get overtaken shortly anyway. We have airband 40GB round us now in rural Devon.
Are your talking about allowance or speed? I thought airband was more akin to 40Mbps.
OT I've been watching Hunan TV while trying to urgently learn Chinese so I can try to work out WTF is going on in the world - it's one of the only channels I can find get online that has (Chinese) subtitles for everything - and they just ran like a 3-minute long ad about the importance of keeping the nation's secrets.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
I started to write "Manufacture 300m masks. Issue all citizens with a mask. Make everyone wear masks.". As a partial solution to how we reopen the economy, maintaining social distancing but trying to protect people until they develop a vaccine.
I *do not* want to have to wear a mask. Its confining. But if thats the only way to restore some kind of restoration of a new normal?
We wear crash helmets on motorbikes and seatbelts in cars. These are confining and now accepted as normal. If masks are needed to get some form of normality, then masks it is.
Perhaps one of the design gurus can come up with a design that feels more comfortable and bring them out in stylish versions.
Not to be frivolous. Oh OK then - am being frivolous. However stylish you make your mask it can never be as stylish as lipstick.
I still don't understand why the UK is unable to do more testing. If we have 50 labs doing this, how come we are only doing 15,000 tests/day?
One lab mentioned in the article can do 2,000 tests/day.
There's clearly some bottleneck, but I haven't yet seen an article that explains it.
Possibly the same issue as Nature documents in America. A couple of weeks back, we too had academic and other labs saying they could run tests but had not been asked. Perhaps it is due to Boris (or Cummings) being off sick but the government has seemed uncoordinated, with no great sense of urgency, doing the right things but very slowly. As a recent pb header said, there should be a Minister of Production to get a hold of things.
Unfortunately fo the last few years the pool of leading politicians has been subject to a very powerful artificial selection mechanism whose drivers are cowardice, dissimulation and witless populism. Don't look for a Winston Churchill among them.
Willingness to go along with a no deal exit from the EU seems to have been a criteria for entry into the current cabinet. Fishing in that pool does not exactly fill me with confidence regarding its competence. Would be Patel and Raab be where they are without that criteria? I doubt it.
We need work for people in construction and a lot of construction companies have HS2 as their big project for 2021-30. So what would you replace it with given that those people will need work to do.
1) Really fast broadband, everywhere.
2) New factories making PPE.
Fast broadband, everywhere, is already part of a separate, and separately funded, strategy.
And will get overtaken shortly anyway. We have airband 40GB round us now in rural Devon.
Are your talking about allowance or speed? I thought airband was more akin to 40Mbps.
If the economic fallout from this is as bad as many of us expect, HS2 will be gone. It’s not especially popular as it is and the pressure on the government to cut spending on non-essentials will be massive.
On the contrary large infrastructure spending is the Roosevelt approach to recovery.
Although it should be noted that wasn't exactly an unmixed success.
Yep, I thought a commonly held view was that the New Deal was necessary to preserve social cohesion and prevent the rise of extremism, but the US economy only recovered properly with the boost given by WWII.
So we've got that to look forward to.
Don't joke, that might be the reality. In an impoverished world where resources are not evenly allocated, there will be those who try to take more by force.
I think it was more that WWII acted at as a giant stimulus package to the American economy - targeting production and infrastructure. Which resulted in a massive stimulus for consumption. The consumption was partly pent up by wartime restrictions - but became a flood in 1945.
I still don't understand why the UK is unable to do more testing. If we have 50 labs doing this, how come we are only doing 15,000 tests/day?
One lab mentioned in the article can do 2,000 tests/day.
There's clearly some bottleneck, but I haven't yet seen an article that explains it.
My other half works as a geneticist in an NHS lab where PCR machines are used in the diagnosis of genetic cancers. A couple of weeks ago, she was fully expecting that they would be switched to Covid-19 testing. This never happened, and she's somewhat baffled as to the reason why, especially as their regular work is drying up due to the lack of samples arriving.
I'm prepared to give something of a pass this time around, just because of the "We're all about to die!" tone of the political response to Covid-19 and the NHS. But the way in which some hospitals have paused everything and - because of the lack of local Covid cases - are effectively doing nothing, needs to be examined and lessons learnt.
You would hope that in any second wave, the Nightingale Hospitals would be sufficiently staffed up and able to take the load that other hospitals would be able to return to much of their usual workload. That in itself would be an immense relief to many people whose more immediate health worry has been something other than the virus, and in many cases has condemned them to months more of pain.
There will also be quite a head of steam to see how we lock in this change from people just rocking up to A&E. It has clearly had an immediate and massive impact on numbers. It may in some cases lead to bad outcomes long term, but ther ehas to be an examination of the previous and subsequent caseloads. Who isn't turning up pany more, what ailments? It can't be as simple as heart attack victims just staying home to die.
I did say thee weeks ago that hospitals were extremely quiet but was shouted down by Tyson and Co and told that I was just giving misinformation. Even now that we are at "peak" there is still plenty of capacity in hospitals.I know many nurses who say they have never done so little at work. Its really odd that we are in the middle of the worst pandemic in a century apparently, yet our hospitals have far more capacity than they would have had 6 months ago.
I did an e-consult yesterday asking my GP if I can have a cardiology appointment as I haven't had a specialist check up on my heart murmur in over 40 years. The response was that outpatient appointments are currently cancelled (which I expected) but that meant there was no way I can even be put into the system. Instead the advice is "contact your GP when the crisis is over". What does that mean? It has a huge bearing on how I conduct myself after lockdown as it will help me to assess my level of risk to CV. Why aren't they setting up a system that can store referrals and issue appointments when they become available?
It is a universal experience, around the world that having your freight traffic on the passenger lines is severely sub-optimal.
Separating the high speed traffic, in particular, always results in a massive improvement - both for the passenger traffic and the freight.
Doesn't the freight (largely) need to go to different places?
e.g. east coast ports to the midlands. HS2 doesn't help with that.
HS2 is about segregating the high speed passenger traffic - this leaves the existing rail network in the areas it passes through in existence. Which can then evolve to be optimal for other things.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Projecting the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 through the postpandemic period https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/04/14/science.abb5793 It is urgent to understand the future of severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. We used estimates of seasonality, immunity, and cross-immunity for betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 from time series data from the USA to inform a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We projected that recurrent wintertime outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 will probably occur after the initial, most severe pandemic wave. Absent other interventions, a key metric for the success of social distancing is whether critical care capacities are exceeded. To avoid this, prolonged or intermittent social distancing may be necessary into 2022. Additional interventions, including expanded critical care capacity and an effective therapeutic, would improve the success of intermittent distancing and hasten the acquisition of herd immunity. Longitudinal serological studies are urgently needed to determine the extent and duration of immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Even in the event of apparent elimination, SARS-CoV-2 surveillance should be maintained since a resurgence in contagion could be possible as late as 2024...
HS2 is about segregating the high speed passenger traffic - this leaves the existing rail network in the areas it passes through in existence. Which can then evolve to be optimal for other things.
But there is no good east-west rail link, and probably never will be while all the money is spent helping commuters get between London and Birmingham a bit quicker.
The people with thermometers are basically finding no-one - in the countries they've been used. If you have noticeable case of this thing, you tend to be lying in bed, feeling shit....
Thanks that's really interesting - not at all saying I don't believe it, do you have a source or a link or something on this?
I started to write "Manufacture 300m masks. Issue all citizens with a mask. Make everyone wear masks.". As a partial solution to how we reopen the economy, maintaining social distancing but trying to protect people until they develop a vaccine.
I *do not* want to have to wear a mask. Its confining. But if thats the only way to restore some kind of restoration of a new normal?
We wear crash helmets on motorbikes and seatbelts in cars. These are confining and now accepted as normal. If masks are needed to get some form of normality, then masks it is.
Perhaps one of the design gurus can come up with a design that feels more comfortable and bring them out in stylish versions.
Not to be frivolous. Oh OK then - am being frivolous. However stylish you make your mask it can never be as stylish as lipstick.
Oh, I don't know. My other half thinks a Yashmak would be definite improvement - on me, that is.
I hear this morning that the government have pushed the button on HS2 this morning.
Sorry, do you mean cancel HS2? (if so, good shout, that money is needed elsewhere)
No, construction has been allowed to start.
The money would not be available elsewhere. The estimated £81 billion is borrowed on the assumption that it will lead to a financial return. So if the railway isn't built, the money doesn't exist.
But it also means that a very large number of people whose jobs were in doubt are now secure as well. Which is not to be sneered at in these times.
Finally, I disagree with RP - commuter trains are not the problem. Freight is. And if we're to start making things in the North of England again as part of a move away from globalisation, we're going to need more railfreight capacity, not less.
It's actually quite easy to have commuter trains ans freight trains on the same network, as - on average - they go at similar speeds. The way we significantly increase capacity is by separating the fast trains from the slow trains.
Exactly. But the other consideration is that freight doesn't necessarily have to go at the same time as commuter trains. So maybe 'local stoppers and semi-fast services' would be a more accurate way of putting it.
It is a universal experience, around the world that having your freight traffic on the passenger lines is severely sub-optimal.
Separating the high speed traffic, in particular, always results in a massive improvement - both for the passenger traffic and the freight.
I am fully conversant with the need to separate out the various flows - combine heavy freight, high(ish) speed passenger and commuter trains. The push to HS2 was based on an explosion in passenger traffic. If we're going to see the opposite then we don't need a high speed railway we need a freight railway. Which is an entirely different proposition - build the Central Railway proposal instead which rebuilt the Great Central to connect Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Hull, the M1 corridor to southern england, London, southern ports and the channel tunnel. For a fraction of the cost / disruption.
We know that Sweden is following a different path to most other countries, but I was very surprised to discover that my colleagues there are still working in the office rather than WFH.
Getting desk jockeys out of circulation would appear to be an obvious thing to do with no economic downside.
You would be astonished, I think, at how many people have
1) Never worked from home, while spending most of their career in jobs which are trivial to WFH. 2) Have not got the equipment required at home. No, I do not jest...
It's a big jump for a lot of people. Just like not flying everywhere on premium airlines was after 9/11...
I can't WFH, partly because I can't do much of my normal job from home, but partly because I am not considered "mobile" staff (despite currently working from 2 offices and recently 3) so I have not been issued with the mobile kit, which is required to dial in over WiFi. So I am currently off on paid special leave rather than WFH.
But as someone who lives on his own, going to work is a way of having casual social contact. In normal times there is also my running club three times a week and parkrun, but if I don't feel like going down the pub then work is a normal part of my contact with people. And I suspect that people who don't live on their own like to get away from their partner/family. (I don't understand all the couples exercising and going shopping together, if you are banged up together 24/7 surely you need some time to yourself?)
I quite understand your case. One problem is that many people have jobs that can be trivially turned to WFM - they do not understand that many can't.
Part of the problem is that modern living - especially in London - has changed the home into a compact box where you sleep. You *live* outside it.
In which case, expect many people to move out of London, getting themselves a bigger home with a bigger "office" - something more than just a place to sleep. If people still aren't going out to bars and concerts and movies and nightclubs of an evening, what is the pull of living in a shoebox in Covid Central?
For many people, their homes are too small to work from for any length of time. Asking people to move to WFH arrangements permanently is effectively offices saying "you'd better buy a bigger house with another bedroom, we're outsourcing our office costs to you. Bad luck, pal."
Many grads and juniors will be living in house shares. And more importantly, how on earth are they supposed to gain experience if everyone is working from home? How does work shadowing even work? You gain experience by being part of the whole process, seeing what everyone does in the office, not just the meetings you are invited to on Zoom. WFH significantly impedes the career progress of junior members of staff.
Finally, for many people the office is a quiet place where they can get work done away from family committments. The blurring of the line between family and home and work and colleagues may seem inviting at first, but could actually be very stressful for some.
Working from home is hell. Better let the old people die to save us from it.
Delays of a week in reacting have cost thousands of lives, but this is the most costly week of all:
China didn't warn public of likely pandemic for six key days, internal records show https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/15/asia-pacific/china-warning-coronavirus-six-days/ In the six days after top Chinese officials secretly determined they likely were facing a pandemic from a new coronavirus, the city of Wuhan at the epicenter of the outbreak hosted a mass banquet for tens of thousands of people; millions began traveling through for Lunar New Year celebrations.
President Xi Jinping warned the public on the seventh day, Jan. 20. But by that time, more than 3,000 people had been infected during almost a week of public silence, according to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press and expert estimates based on retrospective infection data.
That delay from Jan. 14 to Jan. 20 was neither the first mistake made by Chinese officials at all levels in confronting the outbreak, nor the longest lag, as governments around the world have dragged their feet for weeks and even months in addressing the virus.
But the delay by the first country to face the new coronavirus came at a critical time — the beginning of the outbreak. China’s attempt to walk a line between alerting the public and avoiding panic set the stage for a pandemic that has infected almost 2 million people and taken more than 126,000 lives....
We need work for people in construction and a lot of construction companies have HS2 as their big project for 2021-30. So what would you replace it with given that those people will need work to do.
1) Really fast broadband, everywhere.
2) New factories making PPE.
Fast broadband, everywhere, is already part of a separate, and separately funded, strategy.
And will get overtaken shortly anyway. We have airband 40GB round us now in rural Devon.
Are your talking about allowance or speed? I thought airband was more akin to 40Mbps.
Both, it seems.
And there was I was proud as punch of my dig-your-own 1000Mbps FTTP in the wilds of the Yorkshire Dales :-(
The real issue is operating the loan system through the banks. I imagine the idea is to keep headline government borrowing to manageable levels, but given the fact that (a) our banks are still a badly run shambles and (b) nobody has any faith in them whatsoever, the system they have devised would still be running into all kinds of trouble even if they weren’t feathering their own nests.
As has been said on here countless times, well by me anyway, they should bypass the banks and make grants not loans. Oh and be more generous. Sure it will cost but not half as much as allowing a depression to happen faute de mieux and it buys time for the health measures to have a chance of working.
Would it not be better to start off as loans but then write them off when the business re-opens and starts employing people again?
I hear this morning that the government have pushed the button on HS2 this morning.
Sorry, do you mean cancel HS2? (if so, good shout, that money is needed elsewhere)
No, construction has been allowed to start.
The money would not be available elsewhere. The estimated £81 billion is borrowed on the assumption that it will lead to a financial return. So if the railway isn't built, the money doesn't exist.
But it also means that a very large number of people whose jobs were in doubt are now secure as well. Which is not to be sneered at in these times.
Finally, I disagree with RP - commuter trains are not the problem. Freight is. And if we're to start making things in the North of England again as part of a move away from globalisation, we're going to need more railfreight capacity, not less.
It's actually quite easy to have commuter trains ans freight trains on the same network, as - on average - they go at similar speeds. The way we significantly increase capacity is by separating the fast trains from the slow trains.
Exactly. But the other consideration is that freight doesn't necessarily have to go at the same time as commuter trains. So maybe 'local stoppers and semi-fast services' would be a more accurate way of putting it.
It is a universal experience, around the world that having your freight traffic on the passenger lines is severely sub-optimal.
Separating the high speed traffic, in particular, always results in a massive improvement - both for the passenger traffic and the freight.
I am fully conversant with the need to separate out the various flows - combine heavy freight, high(ish) speed passenger and commuter trains. The push to HS2 was based on an explosion in passenger traffic. If we're going to see the opposite then we don't need a high speed railway we need a freight railway. Which is an entirely different proposition - build the Central Railway proposal instead which rebuilt the Great Central to connect Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Hull, the M1 corridor to southern england, London, southern ports and the channel tunnel. For a fraction of the cost / disruption.
The problem with rebuilding the Great Central - which was an argument I was in favour of for a long time until I researched it more carefully - is that contrary to popular belief the trackbed is so heavily built over it would be even more disruptive than building HS2.
Moreover, it goes to the wrong place - Sheffield rather than Manchester.
I started to write "Manufacture 300m masks. Issue all citizens with a mask. Make everyone wear masks.". As a partial solution to how we reopen the economy, maintaining social distancing but trying to protect people until they develop a vaccine.
I *do not* want to have to wear a mask. Its confining. But if thats the only way to restore some kind of restoration of a new normal?
We wear crash helmets on motorbikes and seatbelts in cars. These are confining and now accepted as normal. If masks are needed to get some form of normality, then masks it is.
Perhaps one of the design gurus can come up with a design that feels more comfortable and bring them out in stylish versions.
Not to be frivolous. Oh OK then - am being frivolous. However stylish you make your mask it can never be as stylish as lipstick.
Oh, I don't know. My other half thinks a Yashmak would be definite improvement - on me, that is.
I am just looking at my collection of lipsticks and wondering which one to wear today, even though this will be seen by no-one except me, Daughter and Cats, and any sheep I pass on my daily walk.
Still, standards ....
At this rate I shall be dressing for dinner just for the joy of putting a dress and heels on......
I started to write "Manufacture 300m masks. Issue all citizens with a mask. Make everyone wear masks.". As a partial solution to how we reopen the economy, maintaining social distancing but trying to protect people until they develop a vaccine.
I *do not* want to have to wear a mask. Its confining. But if thats the only way to restore some kind of restoration of a new normal?
We wear crash helmets on motorbikes and seatbelts in cars. These are confining and now accepted as normal. If masks are needed to get some form of normality, then masks it is.
Perhaps one of the design gurus can come up with a design that feels more comfortable and bring them out in stylish versions.
Not to be frivolous. Oh OK then - am being frivolous. However stylish you make your mask it can never be as stylish as lipstick.
Cue fake news rumours about the protective powers of Rimmel london as shelves are cleared by panicking shoppers the length and breadth of the land!
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I started to write "Manufacture 300m masks. Issue all citizens with a mask. Make everyone wear masks.". As a partial solution to how we reopen the economy, maintaining social distancing but trying to protect people until they develop a vaccine.
I *do not* want to have to wear a mask. Its confining. But if thats the only way to restore some kind of restoration of a new normal?
We wear crash helmets on motorbikes and seatbelts in cars. These are confining and now accepted as normal. If masks are needed to get some form of normality, then masks it is.
Perhaps one of the design gurus can come up with a design that feels more comfortable and bring them out in stylish versions.
Not to be frivolous. Oh OK then - am being frivolous. However stylish you make your mask it can never be as stylish as lipstick.
Oh, I don't know. My other half thinks a Yashmak would be definite improvement - on me, that is.
I am just looking at my collection of lipsticks and wondering which one to wear today, even though this will be seen by no-one except me, Daughter and Cats, and any sheep I pass on my daily walk.
Still, standards ....
At this rate I shall be dressing for dinner just for the joy of putting a dress and heels on......
Tiara Tuesdays, darling - all the rage on Zoom down here....
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
I hear this morning that the government have pushed the button on HS2 this morning.
Sorry, do you mean cancel HS2? (if so, good shout, that money is needed elsewhere)
No, construction has been allowed to start.
The money would not be available elsewhere. The estimated £81 billion is borrowed on the assumption that it will lead to a financial return. So if the railway isn't built, the money doesn't exist.
But it also means that a very large number of people whose jobs were in doubt are now secure as well. Which is not to be sneered at in these times.
Finally, I disagree with RP - commuter trains are not the problem. Freight is. And if we're to start making things in the North of England again as part of a move away from globalisation, we're going to need more railfreight capacity, not less.
It's actually quite easy to have commuter trains ans freight trains on the same network, as - on average - they go at similar speeds. The way we significantly increase capacity is by separating the fast trains from the slow trains.
Exactly. But the other consideration is that freight doesn't necessarily have to go at the same time as commuter trains. So maybe 'local stoppers and semi-fast services' would be a more accurate way of putting it.
It is a universal experience, around the world that having your freight traffic on the passenger lines is severely sub-optimal.
Separating the high speed traffic, in particular, always results in a massive improvement - both for the passenger traffic and the freight.
I am fully conversant with the need to separate out the various flows - combine heavy freight, high(ish) speed passenger and commuter trains. The push to HS2 was based on an explosion in passenger traffic. If we're going to see the opposite then we don't need a high speed railway we need a freight railway. Which is an entirely different proposition - build the Central Railway proposal instead which rebuilt the Great Central to connect Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Hull, the M1 corridor to southern england, London, southern ports and the channel tunnel. For a fraction of the cost / disruption.
The problem with rebuilding the Great Central - which was an argument I was in favour of for a long time until I researched it more carefully - is that contrary to popular belief the trackbed is so heavily built over it would be even more disruptive than building HS2.
Moreover, it goes to the wrong place - Sheffield rather than Manchester.
Of course, if we are socially distancing, we will need more trains to carry the same number of people ;-) .
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I'm just devastated by your ability to copy and paste a random link with "life" and "worth" in the title. I admit complete and utter defeat.
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
So what would you like the government to spend in order to save your life? You are already au fait with QALY so let us know your thoughts. You said we should have the debate?
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
No you, you you!
Blah, blah!
Na, na, na, na naaaa|!
Day 23 in the Big Bother House, and IQs are starting to crash dramatically.....
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
Yet another ‘all or nothing’ post.
For crying out loud, I’d expect greater levels of nuance and intelligence on here.
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
If we are letting it rip - baggies I get a ventilator and a couple of specialist trained nurses....
If this is the peak when we haven't yet reached NHS capacity then the policy to lower and extend the peak has worked.
Yes. It doesn't mean our response has been the best that it could have been - or as good as it should have been - but the most important objective will have been met. Regardless of the death toll, if the disease can be managed within the capacity of our health and social care system - i.e. everyone gets the treatment that in their particular case is clinically justified - then this is an acceptable outcome. Not optimal. Not good. But acceptable.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I'm just devastated by your ability to copy and paste a random link with "life" and "worth" in the title. I admit complete and utter defeat.
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
So what would you like the government to spend in order to save your life? You are already au fait with QALY so let us know your thoughts. You said we should have the debate?
I could just as well ask how many lives you think should be sacrificed to preserve your standard of living.
It's no more or less moronic than your proposition.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
According to Sky - the EU is suggesting today that members should be co-ordinating lockdown relaxation procedures - 2 days after Italy/Austria/Denmark relaxed their own in different ways. They are also holding a conference next month on vaccines.
This leadership from behind thing they have going on is very disappointing.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
Beautiful. Nearest I've ever got to something like that were some Puss Moths years ago on the West Coast.
Puss Moth's day will come!
Look forward to seeing the pictures! Don't seem to get them this side of the country. Hoping I may get some Garden Tigers and Hawk Moths. Will share pics if I manage to work out how to copy them across...
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
If we are letting it rip - baggies I get a ventilator and a couple of specialist trained nurses....
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
Ridiculous post. Who is suggesting this?
Anyone who thinks it will be safe to release restrictions "once the peak has passed".
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I'm just devastated by your ability to copy and paste a random link with "life" and "worth" in the title. I admit complete and utter defeat.
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
So what would you like the government to spend in order to save your life? You are already au fait with QALY so let us know your thoughts. You said we should have the debate?
I could just as well ask how many lives you think should be sacrificed to preserve your standard of living.
It's no more or less moronic than your proposition.
Er, no. What do you think NICE does every day of the week when it assesses new medicines (of course you know exactly what they do)? It weighs up cost and benefit.
We are in the same position. The government must weigh up cost (lives lost, economy trashed) and benefit (lives not lost, economy protected). As you so acutely noted, it comes down to that. Of course you use the more emotionally-charged "living standards" which is fine. But it is a trade off nevertheless.
And you wanted to discuss it but now you don't want to discuss it. Which is a shame because from all your postings, it appears that you have all the answers. So let's hear them.
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
The National is a blight which deliberately exploits so-called news stories to mislead those happy to be misled. Identity politics are potentially poisonous and outlets that drip-feed the poison into the bloodstream should be called out.
I don't have a problem debating reasonable civic nationalism but not peddlers of half-truths and propagandists.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
So sorry to have disappointed you.
I shouldn't have used that word. No one knows how they will react in a crisis. I don't hold it against you. As I said, each to their own.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
According to Sky - the EU is suggesting today that members should be co-ordinating lockdown relaxation procedures - 2 days after Italy/Austria/Denmark relaxed their own in different ways. They are also holding a conference next month on vaccines.
This leadership from behind thing they have going on is very disappointing.
If the EU can't act as a single unit on this most elemental of requirements then what is the point of the EU?
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
So sorry to have disappointed you.
I shouldn't have used that word. No one knows how they will react in a crisis. I don't hold it against you. As I said, each to their own.
Thanks. I'm not good at suffering fools gladly, I admit. But at least my reaction hasn't been as moronic as yours.
He is certainly lying by saying "pretty certain". As I said the signs are good, but being over confident is very foolish.
Last Wednesday is the last day where reporting will not have been particularly affected by the bank holiday weekend. It’s far too soon to say that it was the peak. The most you could say is that it is possible.
Given the mood music in Monday’s briefing, the government doesn’t seem to think the peak has been reached.
They are being very, very cautious. The know as soon as they admit the peak has happened, the pressure to end lockdown from the media will be immense. They need to be able to say "the peak has passed, and we will take the following very gradual measures to come out of this....
It also doesn't help that the route up to the peak is very fast and the route down the other side (from Spain and Italy) looks very slow.
Long is the way and hard, that out of Hell leads up to light.
I always loved the bit of the Aeneid that, I presume, Milton was recalling, and although it wasn't my favourite translation generally (possibly because while cramming for my Latin exams it was more helpful to read a pretty literal version, so an unfair criterion to judge poetry translation on!), Dryden's take on it really stuck with me.
"Facilis descensus Averni: Noctes atque dies patet atri ianua Ditis; Sed revocare gradium superasque evadere ad auras, Hoc opus, hic labor est." Virgil, Aeneid, iv. 128.
"The gates of hell are open night and day; Smooth the descent, and easy is the way: But to return, and view the cheerful skies, In this the task and mighty labor lies." Dryden
True when Virgil wrote it, true when Dryden wrote it, all too true today...
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
Ridiculous post. Who is suggesting this?
Anyone who thinks it will be safe to release restrictions "once the peak has passed".
It's also being said that the US Navy is seeking herd immunity on its warships such as the USS Theodore Roosevelt - but it is not clear to me if this is "outside commentator says this is something they are deliberately doing" or "outside commentator says this is something they are, effectively but not consciously, doing"
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
I don't think that's the question. If we all return to work and let the virus rip there's going to be an almighty economic calamity in response to large numbers of working age people falling ill and dying.
No, that'll be fine. Think what a boon it will be that so many old, vulnerable people don't have to be supported any more.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
Ridiculous post. Who is suggesting this?
Anyone who thinks it will be safe to release restrictions "once the peak has passed".
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
As a matter of interest, would you say that the National has any more influence on the SNP administration than the DT, say, does on Mr Johnson's administration? My perception is, markedly less.
Milton Friedman recalled travelling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
Well under my proposal they’d be locked down anyway
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
Even more reason to put incentives on their use - families can set up for granny if she gets Tesco points for use - or whatever.
According to Sky - the EU is suggesting today that members should be co-ordinating lockdown relaxation procedures - 2 days after Italy/Austria/Denmark relaxed their own in different ways. They are also holding a conference next month on vaccines.
This leadership from behind thing they have going on is very disappointing.
Nations have been hit at different times and have different demography and the like, not sure they can or should coordinate too much.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
Excuse me.
My dear 80 year old lady wife is on her smart phone and tablet every day, busily using facebook and whats app and following the family and the news but not yet on PB
If that happened I think it would be very amusing, bless her
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
The National is a blight which deliberately exploits so-called news stories to mislead those happy to be misled. Identity politics are potentially poisonous and outlets that drip-feed the poison into the bloodstream should be called out.
I don't have a problem debating reasonable civic nationalism but not peddlers of half-truths and propagandists.
Perhaps you should have a word with some of your pals whose FIRST instinct was to pin all this on Sturgeon (who I'd say eptitomises so called civic nationalism) and describe her as divisive, grievance mongering and anti English.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
So sorry to have disappointed you.
I shouldn't have used that word. No one knows how they will react in a crisis. I don't hold it against you. As I said, each to their own.
Thanks. I'm not good at suffering fools gladly, I admit. But at least my reaction hasn't been as moronic as yours.
As I say, everyone reacts in a different way and your coping mechanism is to lash out. That's fine. We are the dog that you kick after a difficult day. Happy to oblige.
Now, as to the substance. Give me some of your non-moronic, non-foolish ideas on the cost-benefit approach to dealing with a crisis such as the type we are now in.
If you can get out from under the table for long enough to do so.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I'm just devastated by your ability to copy and paste a random link with "life" and "worth" in the title. I admit complete and utter defeat.
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
So what would you like the government to spend in order to save your life? You are already au fait with QALY so let us know your thoughts. You said we should have the debate?
I could just as well ask how many lives you think should be sacrificed to preserve your standard of living.
It's no more or less moronic than your proposition.
Er, no. What do you think NICE does every day of the week when it assesses new medicines (of course you know exactly what they do)? It weighs up cost and benefit.
We are in the same position. The government must weigh up cost (lives lost, economy trashed) and benefit (lives not lost, economy protected). As you so acutely noted, it comes down to that. Of course you use the more emotionally-charged "living standards" which is fine. But it is a trade off nevertheless.
And you wanted to discuss it but now you don't want to discuss it. Which is a shame because from all your postings, it appears that you have all the answers. So let's hear them.
Of course it's a trade-off. The question is how much weighting we give to lives, and how much weighting we give to living standards.
It's completely moronic to say, in effect, "of course we should do whatever the government/NICE/whoever says we should, because they are taking everything into account and it's a trade-off".
I suggested there should be a debate. Your response was a moronic caricature "What's the monetary value of your life?" Just as moronic as saying "How many lives is your standard of living worth"?
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
You are the one reducing the debate to a level of cartoon think characteristic of the tabloid headline. Stop calling other people morons.
It's fine. Some people (looking at you, @eadric) cope with this situation by ranting constantly about this, that, or the other. Evidently @Chris takes comfort in his belief that no one apart from him really "gets" what this is all about and, as part of his coping mechanism, is calling people morons, idiots, usw.
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
So sorry to have disappointed you.
I shouldn't have used that word. No one knows how they will react in a crisis. I don't hold it against you. As I said, each to their own.
Thanks. I'm not good at suffering fools gladly, I admit. But at least my reaction hasn't been as moronic as yours.
As I say, everyone reacts in a different way and your coping mechanism is to lash out. That's fine. We are the dog that you kick after a difficult day. Happy to oblige.
Now, as to the substance. Give me some of your non-moronic, non-foolish ideas on the cost-benefit approach to dealing with a crisis such as the type we are now in.
If you can get out from under the table for long enough to do so.
I don't think it useful or probably ethical to say how much is a life worth and we'll trade the lives of those people for a specified amount or relaxation to lockdown.
The aim of lockdown should be to get the epidemic under control and then gradually relax the conditions on a risk controlled basis. It also buys time to put mitigation in place.
From a state of maximum restriction you ease off first on the restrictions that make the biggest difference and/or are the lowest risk and add further relaxations in a managed way.
It is perhaps too early to commit to an exit strategy. What should be happening is building up exit "tools".
Use of tech and phones for tracking and tracing. Give airports the capability for testing and quarantining if needed. How can we redesign offices, bars, restaurants to give better social distancing? How do we ration public transport use in rush hour? etc
Get a junior minister in charge of each type of question now and our exit strategy will be more effective when it is needed in a month or twos time.
Indeed, but since an exit strategy will presumably be published at some point Keir can claim a victory when it is and criticise its timing, whenever it is. Smart politics.
On the other hand he's given the govt permission to talk about lifting the lockdown.
Perhaps it would be healthy to have a national debate about this.
We are faced with a difficult choice: (1) Face a cut in our living standards (2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
Agree. Let's begin.
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
OK, fair enough. People are too moronic for that kind of debate. Forget I said it.
I'm just devastated by your ability to copy and paste a random link with "life" and "worth" in the title. I admit complete and utter defeat.
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
So what would you like the government to spend in order to save your life? You are already au fait with QALY so let us know your thoughts. You said we should have the debate?
I could just as well ask how many lives you think should be sacrificed to preserve your standard of living.
It's no more or less moronic than your proposition.
Er, no. What do you think NICE does every day of the week when it assesses new medicines (of course you know exactly what they do)? It weighs up cost and benefit.
We are in the same position. The government must weigh up cost (lives lost, economy trashed) and benefit (lives not lost, economy protected). As you so acutely noted, it comes down to that. Of course you use the more emotionally-charged "living standards" which is fine. But it is a trade off nevertheless.
And you wanted to discuss it but now you don't want to discuss it. Which is a shame because from all your postings, it appears that you have all the answers. So let's hear them.
Of course it's a trade-off. The question is how much weighting we give to lives, and how much weighting we give to living standards.
It's completely moronic to say, in effect, "of course we should do whatever the government/NICE/whoever says we should, because they are taking everything into account and it's a trade-off".
I suggested there should be a debate. Your response was a moronic caricature "What's the monetary value of your life?" Just as moronic as saying "How many lives is your standard of living worth"?
Try to ask a more sensible question.
OK sorry.
How about - what do you think should be the trade off?
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
If they aren't locked down per first point, maybe a hard copy "permit" which could be sent to and printed off by someone competent? What did the South Koreans do or are they 100% tech savvy?
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
As a matter of interest, would you say that the National has any more influence on the SNP administration than the DT, say, does on Mr Johnson's administration? My perception is, markedly less.
There's no correlation between the two. The DT is a serious newspaper which was not afraid the crucify Conservative MPs as it did during the expenses scandal. The National is just a propaganda sheet.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Good point by Hitchens at the end. Those arguing for less extreme measures than the lockdown aren’t asking for nothing at all to be done. That fiction seems prevalent when anyone queries the govt policy
Yes, I’ve noticed this phenomenon with my own group of friends. Very few people are advocating a complete release of the rules, yet anyone who suggests any loosening at all is seen as a reckless pariah.
It would be very unfair to accuse people of being reckless, if their view was based on scientific evidence about the reproduction number of the virus in the current situation, and the likely effect of the measures they are advocating.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
I’d like to see numbers on the following:
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown - compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home - WFH 100% for those that are able - pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside - shops can open but for click and collect only
All those sound sensible - perhaps some carrot to go with the stick though - incentives to use the smartphone app rather than compulsion ?
Smartphone ownership is fairly low amongst the elderly and many of those who have them struggle to use them properly and would not know what to do with an app
Excuse me.
My dear 80 year old lady wife is on her smart phone and tablet every day, busily using facebook and whats app and following the family and the news but not yet on PB
If that happened I think it would be very amusing, bless her
My 91 year old neighbour is clueless on smart phones.
This beautiful morning my wife and I spent pottering in the garden and it was enhanced greatly by our discovery of a robin's nest in our greenhouse with three hungry beaks demanding food.
It came as a surprise and it was just magic watching the parents flying in and out feeding these young mouths
Maybe sentimental, but it is the joy of new life and the world still turning that is needed to lift our spirits above the pain and suffering caused by covid 19
It's entertaining that Unionists all the way from Brillo to nonentities are obsessing about a small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday then dominating the questions and have "Forty a day" Freeman write not once, but twice to Hancock, as well as telephone him.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
'Almost as entertaining as having Sturgeon talk about at her presser yesterday'
Translation please.
'Make the lie big, keep it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it' - The National.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels. ...easy mistake.
You've hystericised yourself into Godwinism as is the wont of your ilk.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
As a matter of interest, would you say that the National has any more influence on the SNP administration than the DT, say, does on Mr Johnson's administration? My perception is, markedly less.
From the pov of someone not in the know, I'd say virtually none aside from its uniqueness as an organ approximately supportive of independence.
Didn't someone recently put up a collection of headlines from the Tele fawning over Boris and HMG? The National would get laughed out of town by indy supporters let alone anyone else if they tried that sort of rubbish.
Comments
THat's why HS2 can have as many as 15-18 tph while the current four track WCML doesn't get much over 16. That second figure will be doubled by putting HS2 on meaning a near trebling of capacity.
So, for example, Cannock might get its trains to London back.
This is not only a wonderful idea for those who need to communicate with the deaf, but also (provided the material used works as a mask and is not prohibitively expensive) should work for the general public. It will allow identification, and it will allow us to smile at each other.
Why do you think such a tiny newspaper with just over 9,000 subscribers has such an influence on the SNP government?
So we've got that to look forward to.
We are faced with a difficult choice:
(1) Face a cut in our living standards
(2) Save lives.
There's no right or wrong answer. But please let's not pretend that's not the question.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2020/04/trump-stands-a-better-chance-of-re-election-in-november-than-you-may-think/
Translation please.
e.g. east coast ports to the midlands. HS2 doesn't help with that.
If they're just advocating loosening of restrictions without any evidence as to the likely effect, that's a different matter.
Sorry, meant Joseph Goebbels.
...easy mistake.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/04/14/science.abb5793
It is urgent to understand the future of severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission. We used estimates of seasonality, immunity, and cross-immunity for betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 from time series data from the USA to inform a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. We projected that recurrent wintertime outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 will probably occur after the initial, most severe pandemic wave. Absent other interventions, a key metric for the success of social distancing is whether critical care capacities are exceeded. To avoid this, prolonged or intermittent social distancing may be necessary into 2022. Additional interventions, including expanded critical care capacity and an effective therapeutic, would improve the success of intermittent distancing and hasten the acquisition of herd immunity. Longitudinal serological studies are urgently needed to determine the extent and duration of immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Even in the event of apparent elimination, SARS-CoV-2 surveillance should be maintained since a resurgence in contagion could be possible as late as 2024...
China didn't warn public of likely pandemic for six key days, internal records show
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/04/15/asia-pacific/china-warning-coronavirus-six-days/
In the six days after top Chinese officials secretly determined they likely were facing a pandemic from a new coronavirus, the city of Wuhan at the epicenter of the outbreak hosted a mass banquet for tens of thousands of people; millions began traveling through for Lunar New Year celebrations.
President Xi Jinping warned the public on the seventh day, Jan. 20. But by that time, more than 3,000 people had been infected during almost a week of public silence, according to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press and expert estimates based on retrospective infection data.
That delay from Jan. 14 to Jan. 20 was neither the first mistake made by Chinese officials at all levels in confronting the outbreak, nor the longest lag, as governments around the world have dragged their feet for weeks and even months in addressing the virus.
But the delay by the first country to face the new coronavirus came at a critical time — the beginning of the outbreak. China’s attempt to walk a line between alerting the public and avoiding panic set the stage for a pandemic that has infected almost 2 million people and taken more than 126,000 lives....
Moreover, it goes to the wrong place - Sheffield rather than Manchester.
Still, standards ....
At this rate I shall be dressing for dinner just for the joy of putting a dress and heels on......
How much would you say your life was worth? How much would you want the government to spend to save your, @Chris' life?
Start with this.
https://nefconsulting.com/how-much-is-a-human-life-worth/
Let's just let it rip and see what happens. Could be fun.
- elderly, infirm and co-morbid under complete lockdown
- compulsory smartphone app with track and trace or stay at home
- WFH 100% for those that are able
- pubs only allowed to open if they have a garden, all drinks served to tables outside
- shops can open but for click and collect only
Blah, blah!
Na, na, na, na naaaa|!
Where do you want to start?
For crying out loud, I’d expect greater levels of nuance and intelligence on here.
At least you lot seemed to have worked out that a story based on statements by an English company, broken by the Times and taken up by the BBC is not under the remit of the SNP or Sturgeon, and you're now turning your ire onto a *checks notes* small, low circulation Scottish tabloid.
I'm all nostalgic for the heady days when Yoons used to crow about the National being a soon-to-expire irrelevance, now it seems you can barely talk of anything else.
Unless, of course, the cherished "herd immunity" doesn't last more than a year or two. Or even a month or two. We don't really know, after all.
But what the hell. This is just TOOOOO BOOOOOORRRRRINNNGGGG!
Let's let it rip and see what happens!!!!!
Each to their own. There are a few posters, that said, and @Chris is one of them, who, when the heat is on, as it is now, have been surprisingly disappointing.
It's no more or less moronic than your proposition.
This leadership from behind thing they have going on is very disappointing.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/15/construction-on-hs2-can-begin-government-says
We are in the same position. The government must weigh up cost (lives lost, economy trashed) and benefit (lives not lost, economy protected). As you so acutely noted, it comes down to that. Of course you use the more emotionally-charged "living standards" which is fine. But it is a trade off nevertheless.
And you wanted to discuss it but now you don't want to discuss it. Which is a shame because from all your postings, it appears that you have all the answers. So let's hear them.
I don't have a problem debating reasonable civic nationalism but not peddlers of half-truths and propagandists.
https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2020/04/15/hs2-signs-off-four-main-civils-contracts-worth-12bn/
‘Saving the money’ would be a false economy.
"Facilis descensus Averni: Noctes atque dies patet atri ianua Ditis; Sed revocare gradium superasque evadere ad auras, Hoc opus, hic labor est." Virgil, Aeneid, iv. 128.
"The gates of hell are open night and day; Smooth the descent, and easy is the way: But to return, and view the cheerful skies, In this the task and mighty labor lies." Dryden
True when Virgil wrote it, true when Dryden wrote it, all too true today...
https://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/herd-immunity-could-keep-coronavirus-afflicted-carriers-in-the-fight-former-navy-captain-says-1.624433
My dear 80 year old lady wife is on her smart phone and tablet every day, busily using facebook and whats app and following the family and the news but not yet on PB
If that happened I think it would be very amusing, bless her
Now, as to the substance. Give me some of your non-moronic, non-foolish ideas on the cost-benefit approach to dealing with a crisis such as the type we are now in.
If you can get out from under the table for long enough to do so.
It's completely moronic to say, in effect, "of course we should do whatever the government/NICE/whoever says we should, because they are taking everything into account and it's a trade-off".
I suggested there should be a debate. Your response was a moronic caricature "What's the monetary value of your life?" Just as moronic as saying "How many lives is your standard of living worth"?
Try to ask a more sensible question.
The aim of lockdown should be to get the epidemic under control and then gradually relax the conditions on a risk controlled basis. It also buys time to put mitigation in place.
From a state of maximum restriction you ease off first on the restrictions that make the biggest difference and/or are the lowest risk and add further relaxations in a managed way.
How about - what do you think should be the trade off?
https://thedailymash.co.uk/news/alcohol/your-guide-to-holding-out-till-midday-before-starting-to-drink-20200326194913
His 89 year old wife, on the other hand....
It came as a surprise and it was just magic watching the parents flying in and out feeding these young mouths
Maybe sentimental, but it is the joy of new life and the world still turning that is needed to lift our spirits above the pain and suffering caused by covid 19
Didn't someone recently put up a collection of headlines from the Tele fawning over Boris and HMG? The National would get laughed out of town by indy supporters let alone anyone else if they tried that sort of rubbish.