If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
Like probably everyone, I checked back.
@Sandpit: "I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas."
@You: "But what if EYE win? That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there."
So I take that as implicitly accepting the 2020 date.
I don't know which they went to. I just know they had a ding dong with their line manager about if they were eligible, then there was a load of pissing about with paperwork, nobody seeming to know who they needed to talk to and then all they said is they were heading off to Bristol to get it done.
I take your word for it do they work for the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust like the lady on BBC who was claiming she had to go to Worcester.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
If it’s costing £50bn a month, as speculated, there’s going to be a hard limit to how long they can extend it.
I don't know which they went to. I just know they had a ding dong with their line manager about if they were eligible, then there was a load of pissing about with paperwork, nobody seeming to know who they needed to talk to and then all they said is they were heading off to Bristol to get it done.
I take your word for it do they work for the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust like the lady on BBC who was claiming she had to go to Worcester.
Strange if so
That is the hospital my friend works at. As I say, the line manager / paperwork process was a shambles.
The fact there are so few testing centres is not acceptable though. These aren't high tech. Its a car park, an events shelter and a few squaddies.
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
I’ve always said 2020!!! Let me run the numbers on 2021, I can get 17 to back that on Betfair.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
@kamski@eristdoof did you see a change in attitude amongst the population in Germany once the discussions about weakening the lockdown started? Is that why the government here are so reluctant to discuss the lockdown perhaps?
I can only say about this corner of cologne, but I would say yes. More people about (but there are more shops and stuff open).
That's why I think it's a good move to make people wear masks - also psychologically to remind people things aren't going back to normal.
I have the impression the lock down was always a bit less strict here than in England, from reports. More things stayed open, no police telling people not to buy Easter eggs, or being given guidance that people shouldn't walk a short distance and sit on a park bench. It's anyway not the police who generally enforce the rules, but the Ordnungsamt, and they seem to be fairly light touch.
It's also true that everyone is supposed to carry ID cards that have your address, so it's pretty easy to check if you are meeting a few people whether you live with them.
I don't know which they went to. I just know they had a ding dong with their line manager about if they were eligible, then there was a load of pissing about with paperwork, nobody seeming to know who they needed to talk to and then all they said is they were heading off to Bristol to get it done.
I take your word for it do they work for the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust like the lady on BBC who was claiming she had to go to Worcester.
Strange if so
That is the hospital my friend works at. As I say, the line manager / paperwork process was a shambles.
The fact there are so few testing centres is not acceptable though. These aren't high tech. Its a car park, an events shelter and a few squaddies.
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
I’ve always said 2020!!! Let me run the numbers on 2021, I can get 17 to back that on Betfair.
We've been on parallel lines, I think.
34 for a 2021 GE is better for both of us than Betfair - which is 17 vs 42. So that's a fair bet.
34 for a 2020 GE is nuts because Betfair is 50 vs 95.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
One would like to think that the was being planned as we speak but not much that I've seen so far fills me with much confidence. The efficiency with which the Nightingale Hospitals were created was impressive but everything else seems to be floundering on our inability to produce anything for ourselves anymore.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
We should have been seeing queues like this for the past 2 months, not the past 2 days.
This is what we desparately need
The Government is also urgently working on setting up a home-testing service for critical key workers, supported by Amazon's logistics network and other commercial partners.
Lets hope we get it soon then 100k per day becomes achievable
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
One would like to think that the was being planned as we speak but not much that I've seen so far fills me with much confidence. The efficiency with which the Nightingale Hospitals were created was impressive but everything else seems to be floundering on our inability to produce anything for ourselves anymore.
It really does seem to depend on who's in charge. If it's PHE it will definitely fail. If it's the cabinet office/Gove there's some hope of success.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
We should have been seeing queues like this for the past 2 months, not the past 2 days.
This is what we desparately need
The Government is also urgently working on setting up a home-testing service for critical key workers, supported by Amazon's logistics network and other commercial partners.
Lets hope we get it soon then 100k per day becomes achievable
I genuinely don't know why a combination of the Army and Amazon couldn't have put together 100+ testing centres (even over the just past few weeks). Its a car park, an event shelter and a few bodies. Then you need the logistics to track / trace and deliver kits and samples....well if Amazon can't do a that, I have no idea how they manage to do millions of parcels every day.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
When do we think there will be cross-over from the media reporting issues around the virus to the media focussing on the economic consequences?
It’ll start to happen as soon as the easing of lockdown measures is first announced, as each industry lobby group will start special pleading with the government via the media.
From a purely political point of view, getting to where we are now has been the easy bit.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
We should have been seeing queues like this for the past 2 months, not the past 2 days.
This is what we desparately need
The Government is also urgently working on setting up a home-testing service for critical key workers, supported by Amazon's logistics network and other commercial partners.
Lets hope we get it soon then 100k per day becomes achievable
I genuinely don't know why a combination of the Army and Amazon couldn't have put together 100+ testing centres (even over the just past few weeks). Its a car park, an event shelter and a few bodies. Then you need the logistics to track / trace and deliver kits and samples....well if Amazon can't do a that, I have no idea how they manage to do millions of parcels every day.
Sadly I wonder if they didnt start doing the planning for the drive thrus until there was spare testing capacity in hospitals, rather than do the planning in parallel so they were ready asap.
They could have set up the centres before testing was available and got some of the 1m volunteers to be dummy users to check the processes worked even without an actual test.
Just popped up on my Facebook page - a version of the Lion Sleeps Tonight. Instead it is ' In the White House, the Mighty White House, the Liar tweets tonight.' I can't get it out of my head.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
Where has Norman smith been for the past 6 months?
I can never get over how Norman Smith is "assistant" political editor when Laura K is Political Editor. He is usually clam, measured, and fairly analytical in what he reports, as opposed to....
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
Like probably everyone, I checked back.
@Sandpit: "I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas."
@You: "But what if EYE win? That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there."
So I take that as implicitly accepting the 2020 date.
No way! My whole comms has been about a 2021 GE.
GE in 2020 is 50 vs 100 on Betfair // GE in 2021 is 17 vs 42 on Betfair.
34 is fair "PB mates price" for a 2021 GE // 34 for a 2020 GE is rip off (of me).
Happy to argue this in court if needs be. I'll represent myself.
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
We should have been seeing queues like this for the past 2 months, not the past 2 days.
This is what we desparately need
The Government is also urgently working on setting up a home-testing service for critical key workers, supported by Amazon's logistics network and other commercial partners.
Lets hope we get it soon then 100k per day becomes achievable
I genuinely don't know why a combination of the Army and Amazon couldn't have put together 100+ testing centres (even over the just past few weeks). Its a car park, an event shelter and a few bodies. Then you need the logistics to track / trace and deliver kits and samples....well if Amazon can't do a that, I have no idea how they manage to do millions of parcels every day.
Sadly I wonder if they didnt start doing the planning for the drive thrus until there was spare testing capacity in hospitals, rather than do the planning in parallel so they were ready asap.
They could have set up the centres before testing was available and got some of the 1m volunteers to be dummy users to check the processes worked even without an actual test.
It is definitely the case they have been dead slow on this (and should have been part of the plan from the beginning), but the army tweeted that squaddies were attending training courses and that was at the start of April. A month later and they are planning on having 50 centres open.
That just isn't enough. Getting the labs setup, that is complex, requires PCR machines, skilled lab techs, reagents etc.
A drive-thru centre, is a few portakabins, some cones and staff having been on a 2 day training course. That isn't rocket science.
Certainly, I don't expect something as sophisticated as South Korea automated prioritised system, but not to even have the setup up they have in the US where you turn up and sit in the queue in your car.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
It also puts the politicians in a terrible position.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
Picked up 16 kilos of flour from Boston windmill today. Lots of bread making ensues.
You planning on feeding the 5000?
2 Loaves a week plus homemade rolls and pizza bases as well as other baking. Probably use a couple of kilos a week. Means we don't have to risk going back again any time soon.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
Picked up 16 kilos of flour from Boston windmill today. Lots of bread making ensues.
You planning on feeding the 5000?
2 Loaves a week plus homemade rolls and pizza bases as well as other baking. Probably use a couple of kilos a week. Means we don't have to risk going back again any time soon.
I can live without bread, but homemade pizza, I am missing.
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
The government has already committed funding for scale up - and there would need to be PIII testing anyway after the six months.
But yes, the correspondents are really poor at asking informed questions. I’m not in the least bit confident I could run a government department, but I could certainly do a far better job of questioning the ones who do...
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
Like probably everyone, I checked back.
@Sandpit: "I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas."
@You: "But what if EYE win? That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there."
So I take that as implicitly accepting the 2020 date.
No way! My whole comms has been about a 2021 GE.
GE in 2020 is 50 vs 100 on Betfair // GE in 2021 is 17 vs 42 on Betfair.
34 is fair "PB mates price" for a 2021 GE // 34 for a 2020 GE is rip off (of me).
Happy to argue this in court if needs be. I'll represent myself.
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
Same with the medical trials. What are we doing in preparation if one of them work? All this stuff is really important and things the government should be planning.
Going to be a disaster if they find something really trivial drug combo works and we find we don't have any, no way of making it, etc.
In the current climate, nobody really cares if the government wastes millions on moonshots.
Then kindly and politely, Whitty needs to be disabused of the notion that he is running the country. He advises. That's it.
He needs to be told he is wrong - life is going back to normal, because PB headbangers will refuse to accept anything else.
I've been saying for several days that we can't open up much if the R is only just below one.
Its not an economy or lives choice, lots of people dying also kills the economy.
Businesses are going to have to cope.
This is surely why in the budget, rates were reduced for a year and each shop/restaurant given a bung of about a year's rent...
R=1 is the *maximum* number allowed, *after* the effects of easing of restrictions. It needs to be well below that for the easing to start, and the easing will have to be done slowly and in stages - to allow monitoring of the weeks-long lag between behavioural change and infection rate. Any hint of it going above 1 leads to an immediate re-lockdown. We’ve got months of this to come.
At last a sensible and credible LoTO. I am looking forward to The Clown making a full recovery. I am also looking forward with glee to his lack of preparedness and "back of a fag packet" mentality being torn apart by one of the first leading politicians in some years to have held down a proper job. It is the first time in my life time that I am hoping for the collapse of a Conservative government
Every chance. The majority is big but the depth of talent and competence is not. I think they might fall over in a heap before too long.
If the depth of talent and competence on the other side was so great then your prediction has a slight chance of coming true. The return of Edward and the worst voice in politics Reeves isn't likely to concern the government.
But only the government team is playing the virus and the economic fallout.
True but as I can see long-term factors outside this government's control make this virus even worse for this country. Care homes are a long-term disaster and the general Health and education standards are not what most would desire, which can't help, we have 27% obesity, among older people much higher.
The economic fallout can't be avoided but we do have a chancellor who so far appears very sharp for a modern politician. I salute the job retention scheme from idea to delivery. If this shutdown doesn't go on too long it will act as a great bridge for most.
What is certain is that the parties will have very different proposals for dealing with the post-corona economy and public finances. This choice will (imo) have to be presented formally to the electorate. There will need to be an overt mandate for the sort of drastic measures which either side favours. So, a GE in 2021 or perhaps early 2022. I know everyone is sick of elections but there seems no way around it. Summer 2021 if I had to stick my neck out. If most people share your very high opinion of Sunak at that time, the Cons will no doubt win again. If not, Starmer and Labour probably get a go.
What on Earth makes you think there will be a GE before the legally mandated date of May 2024?
Betfair offering 17 on a 2021 election, or 50 on 2020 if you're feeling really brave.
I'll stick with the 1.56 on 2024, which pays more than your savings account will over the next four years.
Just about the only thing I can see bringing down the government in the next 18 months, is an extension to the EU exit date leaving the UK responsible for hundreds of billions in EU bailout costs.
That's some of my money wanting 42 there. I'll settle for 34 if you or anybody else is interested . If I get that I will consider it, win or lose, one of my very best value bets. The Dec 12th GE was fought for the right to govern the pre-corona UK. The country by this time next year will be a wholly different place. It will be unrecognizable. The measures required to raise and shape the "new" economy will benefit from a fresh and specific mandate. They will be almost impossible to implement otherwise. Of course the government may try to resist the pressure that they go to the polls and seek that mandate - "we won an election just over a year ago bla bla" - but I don't think such an attitude will wash with the public.
It doesn't need to wash with "The Public", it needs to wash with 365 Tory MPs, more than half of whom need to vote against the government to trigger an election.
I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas.
But what if EYE win?
That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there.
Fair enough, hope someone matches you on Betfair than.
The one that got away. Ah well.
Let's think of a gentle and fair even money £20 bet to do instead. One that settles this year.
I'll revert with a proposal.
I'm happy to bet with you, if you're happy to bet with me? A more fun bet paid to the site is fine, if £660 is too much.
No it's fine. But it's my £20 to your £660. Wanted to make double sure you are OK with that sort of sum.
So if you win - which you will - I donate £20 on your behalf to PB Xmas 2021.
And if I win - which I just might - what happens then with the £660?
Whatever you want me to do with it! (Xmas 2020, nine months from now).
OK, great. I probably would pop over there.
So we are done!
My £20 vs your £660.
I win if there is a UK general election on or before 31 Dec 2021.
You win if there isn't.
Nearly there. Election before 31st Dec 2020 (nine months from now), not 2021.
No!
The whole exchange has been about a 2021 election. Please check it back.
In fact if there is a 2020 one YOU win. I only win if it is in calendar year 2021.
So the "confirmation note" should be amended from "on or before 31 Dec 2021" to "in 2021".
Like probably everyone, I checked back.
@Sandpit: "I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas."
@You: "But what if EYE win? That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there."
So I take that as implicitly accepting the 2020 date.
No way! My whole comms has been about a 2021 GE.
GE in 2020 is 50 vs 100 on Betfair // GE in 2021 is 17 vs 42 on Betfair.
34 is fair "PB mates price" for a 2021 GE // 34 for a 2020 GE is rip off (of me).
Happy to argue this in court if needs be. I'll represent myself.
Protesting a lot.
I have an ex senior officer of HM armed forces impugning (!) my integrity.
It's a person's worst nightmare. I simply HAVE to clear my name.
In other news I have 4 cans of, apparently delicious, Brewdog Clockwork Tangerine to try tonight.
Brewdog are on the shitlist. They fucked over a bunch of small suppliers to their pubs.
That's genuinely very surprising, given their brand is all "ethical punks" stuff.
Some of their beer tastes like rebranded Special Brew.
I didn’t know until recently
a) the Bad Manners song “I love you, yes I do...” was called Special Brew b) it was about the beer!
When I was at Uni in Durham, the Student Union (Dunelm, aka Dutch Elm) was the only place in the NE that would allow punk bands to play. Not much damage that could be done, as it was essentially a concrete cube. We had some really tough crowds in there, but by far the toughest, nastiest, hardest bastards were the skinheads who followed Bad Manners.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
On the vaccine and UK funding, the govt answers seem to be that there is no link between the UK funding and UK getting priority access to the vaccine if it is successful.
If we are still going to be competing for access on exactly the same terms as the rest of the world that seems to be a questionable move.
It is great if the UK govt is the biggest funder worldwide of vaccines, but we should be getting something in return for that, or alternatively working with others to ensure the funding burden is more broadly shared (admittedly not easy given world and UK politics re Trump, China and Brexit/EU).
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
Same with the medical trials. What are we doing in preparation if one of them work? All this stuff is really important and things the government should be planning.
That’s really not so important for now, Government is providing sufficient funding for vaccines development and a certain amount of manufacturing scale up; for the next six months, they have not much more to do on that front.
The urgent stuff is working out how they manage the next six months or more, while we wait. There were some tentative signs at this briefing that they might just be doing some thinking about that.
Then kindly and politely, Whitty needs to be disabused of the notion that he is running the country. He advises. That's it.
He needs to be told he is wrong - life is going back to normal, because PB headbangers will refuse to accept anything else.
I've been saying for several days that we can't open up much if the R is only just below one.
Its not an economy or lives choice, lots of people dying also kills the economy.
Businesses are going to have to cope.
This is surely why in the budget, rates were reduced for a year and each shop/restaurant given a bung of about a year's rent...
R=1 is the *maximum* number allowed, *after* the effects of easing of restrictions. It needs to be well below that for the easing to start, and the easing will have to be done slowly and in stages - to allow monitoring of the weeks-long lag between behavioural change and infection rate. Any hint of it going above 1 leads to an immediate re-lockdown. We’ve got months of this to come.
Sorry, yes, I phrased the first point poorly. I agree. But with our relatively loose lockdown now, I don't see it falling much below one. Giving us little wiggle room.
There will be no desire for a second lockdown. One longer one is much preferable.
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
you will pay more than £2K tax & NI on £10K a month
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
Professor Karel Sikoria reckons 25,000 cancer patients will have gone undiagnosed in April alone.
And that is just one serious disease out of many. But these aren't high profile emergencies that Piers Morgan can rant about, so they don't count.
There never seems any indication from leaks / rumours of what the government plan for managing arrivals as we loosen lockdown. We surely can't just carry on as normal.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The balance between the two options is certainly important and if it is to be for a year plus I dont think the answer is clearcut either way.
To make your calculation "fair", the comparison would need to be hypothetical covid 19 deaths without a lockdown not covid 19 deaths with a lockdown, then the numbers are probably pretty close.
We should certainly be getting cancer testing etc back asap, does it actually need to be in hospitals longer term anyway?
Looking ahead a redesign of our health system in terms of what services can be offered online, what services are offered at each type of building seems appropriate. How many GP appointments could be same day if delivered online instead of at a surgery? Stuff like mandatory turning up for repeat prescriptions is ridiculous.
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
you will pay more than £2K tax & NI on £10K a month
My colleagues on furlough are being topped up to 80% of normal salary. However, those of us still working are also receiving 80%. Temporary pay cut across the board.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Yes, it’s going to be a pretty bad situation for a lot of small businesses.
If she can’t get her costs down enough to be viable, she may be better off closing down if she can find a job elsewhere, and returning to her business after a year or so, or work out some sort of 50/50 between her business and paid employment. Don’t forget that universal credit might also allow her to top up her income, and there will likely be NI and business rates relief.
Good luck to her, and hope things work out. Crap times for us all who are self employed or running small businesses.
A friend in Vienna sends this report in 2 emails - just one view but may be a glimpse of Britain in a month or two...
We are in our second week of coming out of lockdown. Small shops and DIY stores opened last week. 200m lines first 3 days. McDonalds drive ups opened this Monday. Traffic jams. Now, for the last 6 weeks you could only buy food in supermarkets and some delivery services. So a burger was a big deal. Don’t know why they closed the Hot Dog/kebab/Chinese walk up places.
Next week hair salons, all shops open. Mid May restaurants open. Of course regulations with all these steps. We must wear masks in stores, on public transport. When restaurants open, servers wear mask, distancing between tables, testing of workers. WFH suggested till at least mid May. Very strange experience going out. Mask is a pain to get used to. It gets hot under there and air temp is not even that warm yet.
Also felt strange to be ‘out in the big world’. Once I got used to it, it has been a really cosy life - walks with dogs, exploring neighborhood, chatting with friends, doing exercising, reading, doing crafts. Just enjoying the day. No place to rush. The neighborhood is my safety zone. Almost felt like a tad of agoraphobia to foray into the rest of Vienna. I plan on keeping a lot of the current lifestyle. I will get used to it. Museums might open In May. Concerts not till September!!! And they are debating on opening swimming pools - that with 40 degrees and no AC would be a bummer.
I still fear we will look back on these days as idyllic. Economic fallout will be globally devastating and then people/countries will go into survival mode which can get ugly. I will go enjoy beautiful weather with dogs while I can.
------------------- That first foray was a bit depressing - and you know me. I am the eternal optimist. Just thinking that this new normal will last for a long time. The details of the new reality (what do I do if someone sits next to me or reaches back across me in supermarket - will I get fined?) have to be experienced. And the gladness of at least seeing different people turned a bit into - some people are overrated. 😉 Nice to crawl back to cosy “Lockdown” world.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
you will pay more than £2K tax & NI on £10K a month
That's not something that needs spelling out lol. My net rate of tax was ~35% last year.
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
Same with the medical trials. What are we doing in preparation if one of them work? All this stuff is really important and things the government should be planning.
Going to be a disaster if they find something really trivial drug combo works and we find we don't have any, no way of making it, etc.
In the current climate, nobody really cares if the government wastes millions on moonshots.
government ballsed up by originally saying they were following the science instead of making clear everything is a political decision . Why not make prof whitty pm then? Also no doubt if asked he would say smoking shoud be banned, beer should be £10 a pint and the speed limit should be 30 mph so why not implement those
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
you will pay more than £2K tax & NI on £10K a month
My colleagues on furlough are being topped up to 80% of normal salary. However, those of us still working are also receiving 80%. Temporary pay cut across the board.
Poor form from your employer imo. Even if they went to 90% for the still working at least it would be a gesture towards them, sometimes that counts as much as the amounts itself.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
No. It’s the fault of the lockdown. That’s a government choice. As Andy says, at some point soon the government will have to allow the economy to operate while protecting vulnerable groups with continued isolation.
I wish someone would ask about vaccine manufacturing capacity. The last thing we need is for the Oxford team to come up with a valid vaccine in 6 months and have nowhere in the country to make it in mass quantities. Relying on the international market has proved to be unreliable. We need to be in charge of this step at home, even if it means giving GSK and Astra a massive load of cash to build vaccine production.
Same with the medical trials. What are we doing in preparation if one of them work? All this stuff is really important and things the government should be planning.
Going to be a disaster if they find something really trivial drug combo works and we find we don't have any, no way of making it, etc.
In the current climate, nobody really cares if the government wastes millions on moonshots.
We could fund expanded contract manufacturing capacity both for pharmaceuticals and biologicals, though. Wouldn’t be a bad idea at all.
I presume if something like that is the miracle cure, the likes of Gilead will be more than willing to allow it to be made under licence, for a healthy fee of course.
According to the Mail (so it must be true), the lock down is already crumbling with more people returning to work and travelling today. We'll see if that is borne out by the daily briefing on travelling numbers. Road traffic remains at 40% of normal with tube travel between 5-10% of normal.
Given the Government appears split from stem to stern on when and how the lock down will be lifted, I'm sure any increase in mass travel will be carefully watched for an impact on case numbers.
I remain confused - there are less than 1000 reported cases in Newham (that's people who have Covid-19 or have had it) out of a population of 350,000 so not large but to what degree does that under report the actual number of cases? I can't get a straight answer about this - I could believe a factor of 10 so 10,000 people with Covid-19 in Newham (including those with mild symptoms or asymptomatic). Okay that's still only 3.5% of the population so is the factor larger - perhaps 20 which would make 7% infected?
So, a question for those considering an early lifting of the lockdown. Which is the worse outcome? I mean for the country and the population rather than politically for the Government.
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form. 2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences: For the economy For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
Just got word through, my company are set to furlough around 50% of the office, apparently I'm in the list. Everyone on 80% of salary, company topping up where £2500 isn't enough.
Life is about to get a lot more boring.
That sounds exceptionally generous of the company.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
you will pay more than £2K tax & NI on £10K a month
My colleagues on furlough are being topped up to 80% of normal salary. However, those of us still working are also receiving 80%. Temporary pay cut across the board.
Poor form from your employer imo. Even if they went to 90% for the still working at least it would be a gesture towards them, sometimes that counts as much as the amounts itself.
I wouldn't mind if they'd said we are being put on a 4 day week, but we are still doing 100% of the work.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
When do we think there will be cross-over from the media reporting issues around the virus to the media focussing on the economic consequences?
It’ll start to happen as soon as the easing of lockdown measures is first announced, as each industry lobby group will start special pleading with the government via the media.
From a purely political point of view, getting to where we are now has been the easy bit.
It will become inevitable as more people will be directly affected by, or know someone who is directly affected by, the mounting economic consequences.
Within a couple of months, many journalists will have been made redundant (ad revenues massively down). Many more will have partners or family members who have lost their jobs. Plenty will be worried about paying their mortgage, school fees, etc.
The fear among journalists that they could be next to lose their job/home/employer is what will drive the narrative, because that will be what will be happening all around us. It will overwhelm any fear of the virus (which in any rate has a negligible mortality rate for those of working age).
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
No. It’s the fault of the lockdown. That’s a government choice. As Andy says, at some point soon the government will have to allow the economy to operate while protecting vulnerable groups with continued isolation.
This is rubbish.
Its not just death that stalks the economy. It's fear of infection. It's concern for loved ones. It's realisation that 20% of the economy are going to be ill in bed at any one time if the lockdown is lifted.
The economy isn't going to function out of a lockdown, so why risk it?
So, a question for those considering an early lifting of the lockdown. Which is the worse outcome? I mean for the country and the population rather than politically for the Government.
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form. 2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences: For the economy For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
As a small business owner with significant cash reserves, currently functioning on 70% drop in sales (and I think we'll be in this sort of position till December) with only about 1/3 of my staff furloughed, I'd much prefer one longer lockdown and fewer deaths.
Edit to add - and I agree with your last sentence. Lifting the lockdown isn't going to revive the economy anyway. Its simplistic, wishful thinking to assume otherwise.
So, a question for those considering an early lifting of the lockdown. Which is the worse outcome? I mean for the country and the population rather than politically for the Government.
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form. 2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences: For the economy For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
Your latter point is what I expect to happen, backed up with polling, so the government lifts the lockdown, removes the business support, and people still act as if there is a lockdown as they don't want to risk their health, and the health of their families.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
No. It’s the fault of the lockdown. That’s a government choice. As Andy says, at some point soon the government will have to allow the economy to operate while protecting vulnerable groups with continued isolation.
But what would happen economically without a lockdown? Best guesses were 20% of the workforce off sick and people petrified, not a normal functioning economy either.
Gunman who streamed himself on Instagram firing shots from balcony at panicked shoppers while rapping to Tupac is record company boss who posts photos of exotic holidays and designer clothes to his 57,000 social media followers
So, a question for those considering an early lifting of the lockdown. Which is the worse outcome? I mean for the country and the population rather than politically for the Government.
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form. 2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences: For the economy For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
As a small business owner with significant cash reserves, currently functioning on 70% drop in sales (and I think we'll be in this sort of position till December) with only about 1/3 of my staff furloughed, I'd much prefer one longer lockdown and fewer deaths.
Edit to add - and I agree with your last sentence. Lifting the lockdown isn't going to revive the economy anyway. Its simplistic, wishful thinking to assume otherwise.
The fact that you have significant cash reserves gives you away. Most people don’t.
Tens of thousands of lives could be saved every year if we (a) banned smoking, (b) banned driving, (c) banned fatty and sugary foods. The government doesn't ban them because they believe that liberty is more important.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
No. It’s the fault of the lockdown. That’s a government choice. As Andy says, at some point soon the government will have to allow the economy to operate while protecting vulnerable groups with continued isolation.
But what would happen economically without a lockdown? Best guesses were 20% of the workforce off sick and people petrified, not a normal functioning economy either.
Of course, but as I keep saying it shouldn’t be all or nothing. There needs to be creative thinking on how we can ease it without causing catastrophe.
Hard lockdown day today. No major issues, just heartily sick of it. I count myself lucky, but 😱.
I've had a few of those. Recently I've found that getting stuck in to something creative you enjoy helps a lot.
Same here. Days of being actually quite happy - sunshine, wine, pretty young wife - then I will have a black day, out of nowhere.
Thinking ahead makes it worse. Live in the moment. Is best.
I've struggled with depression and anxiety for most of my life. Apart from some occasional OCD reoccurrance, I'm more relaxed than I've been for years. Its weird - I'm sleeping wonderfully, eating well, drinking only moderately. But we don't have any kids, and have an income and savings, and a garden. And we live near the coast. I recognise how lucky we are, and that many others won't have any of those and be struggling.
It is an awful, awful choice to stay locked down - but I think its a worse one to lift it in any way other than superficially.
Professor Karel Sikoria reckons 25,000 cancer patients will have gone undiagnosed in April alone.
And that is just one serious disease out of many. But these aren't high profile emergencies that Piers Morgan can rant about, so they don't count.
Oh absolutely. It's a slow motion disaster that will play out quietly and despairingly in individual households over many years, and will therefore be ignored.
Of course, there is one way to partially ease the lockdown which *might* achieve the double whammy of both greatly easing the pressure on the economy and stopping the NHS from filling to bursting with more seriously ill Covid patients, although absent the data and insight of a professional epidemiologist I've no idea how effective it could be in practice. It relies on the fact that, if we take recently reported Italian statistics as being typical, about 96% of all fatalities occur in patients aged 60 or over.
The state could force all the over-60s to shield - as in, make it basically illegal for them to go out unless it's to go to hospital or escape from a fire, or for anyone to enter their homes physically unless it's a medical practitioner or someone else who lives there - and let everybody else back out. Subject, of course, to some rudimentary social distancing measures, such as limiting the density of customers in shops and an ongoing ban on mass gatherings (e.g. big sports matches and music festivals.) The cost of lowering the state pension age, paying the rents and mortgages of those affected and arranging home delivery of food to the whole lot of them would still, surely, be less than shuttering a large chunk of the economy and having 20-30% of the working age population unemployed or on furlough?
If we're serious about finding a method that doesn't involve mass casualties from Covid or mass casualties from poverty and medical neglect, then perhaps a solution something like that needs to be considered?
So, a question for those considering an early lifting of the lockdown. Which is the worse outcome? I mean for the country and the population rather than politically for the Government.
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form. 2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences: For the economy For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
A small part of the answer on how to relax the lockdown could be stricter pre planned lockdowns on specified dates. Xmas/New Year being the obvious one.
Something like gradual release of lockdown June-August, then back to current one for 2-3 weeks on known dates (allowing planning) in mid October, Xmas and March 2021.
This would definitely help business plan, alleviate pressure on the NHS and I think also could be understood by the public without the hit on morale that you suggest.
If that is the case what on earth is going to happen when the furlough scheme ends at the end of June? Mass unemployment, businesses closed for good, fall in tax revenue.....?
That’s going to be the difficult bit. There’s eventually going to be a limit to how much government can keep the exceptional support flowing, and when it ends there’s going to be a lot of people moving onto the much-less-generous standard unemployment benefit and universal credit systems.
As was made clear at the press conference today by Dr Whitty, while the initial lockdown strategy was very much science-driven, the next phases become much more political in terms of the timing and decisions made.
Or the furlough scheme will be extended.
For a year or more? How realistic is that?
The reason it was done is the alternative of doing nothing was worse. We could scale it back a bit, reduce the govt subsidy, start to tighten which companies are eligible, but it will need to be very substantial for as long as we have a lockdown similar to the current one.
I agree. At the moment the government is giving false hope: businesses like my daughter’s are trying to do what business they can so as to keep going and have a business for when the lockdown is lifted, in whole or in part. But if that is not going to happen - as implied by Whitty’s comments - then she (and many others like hers) may as well pack up now and close their businesses. Surviving on 30% of previous revenues simply isn’t tenable for a year or more.
I feel despairing about it all.
Just one of the many catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. The BBC is also reporting on the vast numbers of cancelled cancer treatments, screenings and referrals, which in turn will only be a fraction of the total number of urgent medical cases that are failing to be diagnosed or treated because of the scramble to stick a lid on Covid-19. And then there's the business failures, the layings off, the poverty and the consequent tsunami of mental illness that we've got heading our way.
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
The lockdown can't continue for more than a few more weeks without ruining the economy, especially when it hardly affects younger people in good health. The government has to trust the people to do the right thing and not keep everyone locked down for months.
The really worrying issue isn't the virus, its the virus rampant plus healthcare collapse.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
No. It’s the fault of the lockdown. That’s a government choice. As Andy says, at some point soon the government will have to allow the economy to operate while protecting vulnerable groups with continued isolation.
This is rubbish.
Its not just death that stalks the economy. It's fear of infection. It's concern for loved ones. It's realisation that 20% of the economy are going to be ill in bed at any one time if the lockdown is lifted.
The economy isn't going to function out of a lockdown, so why risk it?
Tens of thousands of lives could be saved every year if we (a) banned smoking, (b) banned driving, (c) banned fatty and sugary foods. The government doesn't ban them because they believe that liberty is more important.
I’d love to see some polling on liberty vs security in the context of mobile tracking apps.
Difficult for them to phrase neutrally, but I suspect there’s considerably more opposition to them than policymakers might think.
Comments
@Sandpit: "I'll have up to twenty quid of your 34 on 2020 if you like? If I win, you can donate my winnings to the PB hosting fund at Christmas."
@You: "But what if EYE win? That's £660 and you're in the Middle East. I'm not coming over there."
So I take that as implicitly accepting the 2020 date.
https://twitter.com/BristolAirport/status/1252958896483979265?s=20
Strange if so
The fact there are so few testing centres is not acceptable though. These aren't high tech. Its a car park, an events shelter and a few squaddies.
Fancy me doubting you, if only you had posted that earlier i could have finished my Bacardi and Coke in peace.
Dont set flour rumours going or Mrs BJ will want me to get down there for some she is itchung to bake apparently
That's why I think it's a good move to make people wear masks - also psychologically to remind people things aren't going back to normal.
I have the impression the lock down was always a bit less strict here than in England, from reports. More things stayed open, no police telling people not to buy Easter eggs, or being given guidance that people shouldn't walk a short distance and sit on a park bench. It's anyway not the police who generally enforce the rules, but the Ordnungsamt, and they seem to be fairly light touch.
It's also true that everyone is supposed to carry ID cards that have your address, so it's pretty easy to check if you are meeting a few people whether you live with them.
Have a good evening
Im too pissed to post now
34 for a 2021 GE is better for both of us than Betfair - which is 17 vs 42. So that's a fair bet.
34 for a 2020 GE is nuts because Betfair is 50 vs 95.
The Government is also urgently working on setting up a home-testing service for critical key workers, supported by Amazon's logistics network and other commercial partners.
Lets hope we get it soon then 100k per day becomes achievable
The lady who made our existences infinitely more wonderful by proving we are all made from stardust.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/apr/22/margaret-burbidge-obituary
From a purely political point of view, getting to where we are now has been the easy bit.
They could have set up the centres before testing was available and got some of the 1m volunteers to be dummy users to check the processes worked even without an actual test.
I feel despairing about it all.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/apr/02/brewdog-hand-sanitiser-turned-down-local-hospitals-scotland
Turns out repurposing complex existing industrial processes for other products, with exacting specifications, is tricky. I would never have guessed.
GE in 2020 is 50 vs 100 on Betfair // GE in 2021 is 17 vs 42 on Betfair.
34 is fair "PB mates price" for a 2021 GE // 34 for a 2020 GE is rip off (of me).
Happy to argue this in court if needs be. I'll represent myself.
So, on a hypothetical salary of £10k, reduced to £8k, gov pay £2.5k and company £5.5k, is that right?
That just isn't enough. Getting the labs setup, that is complex, requires PCR machines, skilled lab techs, reagents etc.
A drive-thru centre, is a few portakabins, some cones and staff having been on a 2 day training course. That isn't rocket science.
Certainly, I don't expect something as sophisticated as South Korea automated prioritised system, but not to even have the setup up they have in the US where you turn up and sit in the queue in your car.
a) the Bad Manners song “I love you, yes I do...” was called Special Brew
b) it was about the beer!
Its not an economy or lives choice, lots of people dying also kills the economy.
Businesses are going to have to cope.
This is surely why in the budget, rates were reduced for a year and each shop/restaurant given a bung of about a year's rent...
Some detail on manufacturing capacity here:
https://www.biopharma-reporter.com/Article/2020/04/20/Alliance-to-scale-Oxford-University-coronavirus-vaccine
(Note the story is from the day before Hancock’s “important news”...)
But yes, the correspondents are really poor at asking informed questions.
I’m not in the least bit confident I could run a government department, but I could certainly do a far better job of questioning the ones who do...
https://twitter.com/mikeholden42/status/1253007027804176384?s=21
Going to be a disaster if they find something really trivial drug combo works and we find we don't have any, no way of making it, etc.
In the current climate, nobody really cares if the government wastes millions on moonshots.
It's a person's worst nightmare. I simply HAVE to clear my name.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-52385006
And they seemed all so cuddly and fun on TOTP....
I'm worried that the Government will have us in lockdown all Summer because the population is terrified of the virus and ministers themselves are terrified of being accused of failing to crush it. About ten or twenty times as many people will then end up perishing from the effects of the lockdown as have died or will die from the disease itself.
If we are still going to be competing for access on exactly the same terms as the rest of the world that seems to be a questionable move.
It is great if the UK govt is the biggest funder worldwide of vaccines, but we should be getting something in return for that, or alternatively working with others to ensure the funding burden is more broadly shared (admittedly not easy given world and UK politics re Trump, China and Brexit/EU).
Government is providing sufficient funding for vaccines development and a certain amount of manufacturing scale up; for the next six months, they have not much more to do on that front.
The urgent stuff is working out how they manage the next six months or more, while we wait.
There were some tentative signs at this briefing that they might just be doing some thinking about that.
There will be no desire for a second lockdown. One longer one is much preferable.
And that is just one serious disease out of many. But these aren't high profile emergencies that Piers Morgan can rant about, so they don't count.
To make your calculation "fair", the comparison would need to be hypothetical covid 19 deaths without a lockdown not covid 19 deaths with a lockdown, then the numbers are probably pretty close.
We should certainly be getting cancer testing etc back asap, does it actually need to be in hospitals longer term anyway?
Looking ahead a redesign of our health system in terms of what services can be offered online, what services are offered at each type of building seems appropriate. How many GP appointments could be same day if delivered online instead of at a surgery? Stuff like mandatory turning up for repeat prescriptions is ridiculous.
If she can’t get her costs down enough to be viable, she may be better off closing down if she can find a job elsewhere, and returning to her business after a year or so, or work out some sort of 50/50 between her business and paid employment. Don’t forget that universal credit might also allow her to top up her income, and there will likely be NI and business rates relief.
Good luck to her, and hope things work out. Crap times for us all who are self employed or running small businesses.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8246167/Spain-sends-second-batch-faulty-coronavirus-tests-China.html
We are in our second week of coming out of lockdown. Small shops and DIY stores opened last week. 200m lines first 3 days. McDonalds drive ups opened this Monday. Traffic jams. Now, for the last 6 weeks you could only buy food in supermarkets and some delivery services. So a burger was a big deal. Don’t know why they closed the Hot Dog/kebab/Chinese walk up places.
Next week hair salons, all shops open. Mid May restaurants open. Of course regulations with all these steps. We must wear masks in stores, on public transport. When restaurants open, servers wear mask, distancing between tables, testing of workers. WFH suggested till at least mid May. Very strange experience going out. Mask is a pain to get used to. It gets hot under there and air temp is not even that warm yet.
Also felt strange to be ‘out in the big world’. Once I got used to it, it has been a really cosy life - walks with dogs, exploring neighborhood, chatting with friends, doing exercising, reading, doing crafts. Just enjoying the day. No place to rush. The neighborhood is my safety zone. Almost felt like a tad of agoraphobia to foray into the rest of Vienna. I plan on keeping a lot of the current lifestyle. I will get used to it. Museums might open In May. Concerts not till September!!! And they are debating on opening swimming pools - that with 40 degrees and no AC would be a bummer.
I still fear we will look back on these days as idyllic. Economic fallout will be globally devastating and then people/countries will go into survival mode which can get ugly. I will go enjoy beautiful weather with dogs while I can.
-------------------
That first foray was a bit depressing - and you know me. I am the eternal optimist. Just thinking that this new normal will last for a long time. The details of the new reality (what do I do if someone sits next to me or reaches back across me in supermarket - will I get fined?) have to be experienced. And the gladness of at least seeing different people turned a bit into - some people are overrated. 😉 Nice to crawl back to cosy “Lockdown” world.
That is the alternative to a lockdown. And why any restriction easing will be slow and low...
The economy being ruined isn't the fault of the lockdown. Its the fault of the virus.
For new drugs like that, I’m not sure how much we could do, as the manufacturing is both in foreign ownership, and proprietary. Details from Gilead’s website...
https://www.gilead.com/purpose/advancing-global-health/covid-19/working-to-supply-remdesivir-for-covid-19
We could fund expanded contract manufacturing capacity both for pharmaceuticals and biologicals, though. Wouldn’t be a bad idea at all.
According to the Mail (so it must be true), the lock down is already crumbling with more people returning to work and travelling today. We'll see if that is borne out by the daily briefing on travelling numbers. Road traffic remains at 40% of normal with tube travel between 5-10% of normal.
Given the Government appears split from stem to stern on when and how the lock down will be lifted, I'm sure any increase in mass travel will be carefully watched for an impact on case numbers.
I remain confused - there are less than 1000 reported cases in Newham (that's people who have Covid-19 or have had it) out of a population of 350,000 so not large but to what degree does that under report the actual number of cases? I can't get a straight answer about this - I could believe a factor of 10 so 10,000 people with Covid-19 in Newham (including those with mild symptoms or asymptomatic). Okay that's still only 3.5% of the population so is the factor larger - perhaps 20 which would make 7% infected?
1. The lockdown is maintained for another 3 or 4 months in its current form.
2. The lockdown is lifted, either slowly or rapidly and then people start to die again so it has to be re-imposed.
I am thinking of consequences:
For the economy
For people who, in the second case, catch the disease because the lockdown has been lifted
For people who, in the first case, die because they miss treatment, commit suicide or are victims of domestic abuse
For the long term moral of the people and business confidence if there is a short lifting followed by re-imposition.
Also what happens if the Government start to lift the lockdown and the majority of people decide it is not safe and stay away? I assume that could actually be worse for businesses than if the lockdown had stayed in place.
Within a couple of months, many journalists will have been made redundant (ad revenues massively down). Many more will have partners or family members who have lost their jobs. Plenty will be worried about paying their mortgage, school fees, etc.
The fear among journalists that they could be next to lose their job/home/employer is what will drive the narrative, because that will be what will be happening all around us. It will overwhelm any fear of the virus (which in any rate has a negligible mortality rate for those of working age).
Its not just death that stalks the economy. It's fear of infection. It's concern for loved ones. It's realisation that 20% of the economy are going to be ill in bed at any one time if the lockdown is lifted.
The economy isn't going to function out of a lockdown, so why risk it?
Edit to add - and I agree with your last sentence. Lifting the lockdown isn't going to revive the economy anyway. Its simplistic, wishful thinking to assume otherwise.
https://twitter.com/benatipsosmori/status/1252476096735580160
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8244571/Terrifying-moment-gunman-sparks-chaos-Chatham-shooting-people-balcony.html
Can't be long until we find out he also offered the government PPE...
It is an awful, awful choice to stay locked down - but I think its a worse one to lift it in any way other than superficially.
Of course, there is one way to partially ease the lockdown which *might* achieve the double whammy of both greatly easing the pressure on the economy and stopping the NHS from filling to bursting with more seriously ill Covid patients, although absent the data and insight of a professional epidemiologist I've no idea how effective it could be in practice. It relies on the fact that, if we take recently reported Italian statistics as being typical, about 96% of all fatalities occur in patients aged 60 or over.
The state could force all the over-60s to shield - as in, make it basically illegal for them to go out unless it's to go to hospital or escape from a fire, or for anyone to enter their homes physically unless it's a medical practitioner or someone else who lives there - and let everybody else back out. Subject, of course, to some rudimentary social distancing measures, such as limiting the density of customers in shops and an ongoing ban on mass gatherings (e.g. big sports matches and music festivals.) The cost of lowering the state pension age, paying the rents and mortgages of those affected and arranging home delivery of food to the whole lot of them would still, surely, be less than shuttering a large chunk of the economy and having 20-30% of the working age population unemployed or on furlough?
If we're serious about finding a method that doesn't involve mass casualties from Covid or mass casualties from poverty and medical neglect, then perhaps a solution something like that needs to be considered?
Something like gradual release of lockdown June-August, then back to current one for 2-3 weeks on known dates (allowing planning) in mid October, Xmas and March 2021.
This would definitely help business plan, alleviate pressure on the NHS and I think also could be understood by the public without the hit on morale that you suggest.
Difficult for them to phrase neutrally, but I suspect there’s considerably more opposition to them than policymakers might think.