So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
If someone gets it in this country then there will be doubt as to how they were infected.
If someone gets the symptoms a few days after two weeks in Spain then there's no doubt they caught it on holiday.
And if they then went on to infect multiple other co-workers ...
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
For cruising, I can see travel insurance becoming a compulsory requirement. Thereby excluding the more elderly and ill passengers who travel uninsured and rely on being helilifted off the ship when the worst happens. Which is probably a good thing.
On all the cruises I have been on we had to have travel insurance confirmed before we boarded
They ask you lots of times, but I don’t think there are many cruises where it is actually a compulsory requirement of travel. A peruse of the cruising forums suggest there are a lot of elderly folks who can’t afford the quoted premiums and board willing to take their chances.
Or, rather, for the ship to take their chances for them.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
Sure. But foreign travel is entirely discretionary.
The other big takeaway from that IEA is this: we will know if it is seasonal quite soon. This is huge as it will tell us whether we are due a much bigger second wave
Officially there hasn't been a single death from the virus in Vietnam, a nation of 100 million people adjacent to the country where it started. A reminder of why we need to regard most of the data with a pinch of salt.
» show previous quotes Thanks that was my guess but I wonder how a later peak has come about in Scotland and Wales given that means it must have continued growing while in lockdown? Seems like an interesting oddity.
All those infected buggers coming up from London spreading it willy nilly.
My guess is that the proportion of infections in care homes and hospitals was a lot higher than London, where it was also spreading fast in the wider community. The lockdown thus had less effect.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
Sure. But foreign travel is entirely discretionary.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
Sure. But foreign travel is entirely discretionary.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
If someone gets it in this country then there will be doubt as to how they were infected.
If someone gets the symptoms a few days after two weeks in Spain then there's no doubt they caught it on holiday.
And if they then went on to infect multiple other co-workers ...
There will be doubt where they caught it on holiday just as there may be doubt where they caught it in town but in both cases they were out of the house and not in lockdown
» show previous quotes Thanks that was my guess but I wonder how a later peak has come about in Scotland and Wales given that means it must have continued growing while in lockdown? Seems like an interesting oddity.
All those infected buggers coming up from London spreading it willy nilly.
My guess is that the proportion of infections in care homes and hospitals was a lot higher than London, where it was also spreading fast in the wider community. The lockdown thus had less effect.
Given they were discharging people with the virus and sending them to care homes it is little wonder it spread like wildfire.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
How many extra deaths would you accept to end lockdown ?
Under 50s have a less than 0.5% death rate from Covid, now we are passed the peak most of the workforce can get back to work with no likely significant rise in deathrate.
Just get mass testing up and advise over 70s to stay indoors unless absolutely necessary to travel or go outside
The Trump school of dealing with the crisis on view
No, the common sense view, as you are over 80 and retired you might want to stay indoors longer but for most young people in the workforce there is very little risk of dying from Covid
You are far more like Trump then you may want to admit.
And I am not over 80
Even more like Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the architects of Obamacare:
Q: What’s wrong with simply enjoying an extended life?
A: These people who live a vigorous life to 70, 80, 90 years of age—when I look at what those people “do,” almost all of it is what I classify as play. It’s not meaningful work. They’re riding motorcycles; they’re hiking. Which can all have value—don’t get me wrong. But if it’s the main thing in your life? Ummm, that’s not probably a meaningful life.
Part of his argument for why people over the age of 75 shouldn't get healthcare.
Americans do have a habit of thinking that life is working, Italians that life is eating.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
Sure. But foreign travel is entirely discretionary.
So is going to the pub, restaurant, gym or cinema
How would you know if you had been infected at any of those ?
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
They will if people stop panicking, given coronavirus is now across the developed world you are not any more at risk going on holiday to Spain really than walking down the high street and going to a pub or restaurant there.
It’s not panic. It’s confidence. Will you get health insurance?
If you are under 50 certainly, though the cruise industry might be hit a bit more admittedly
You fancy dealing with CV19 during a family holiday in Spain. Not sure I fancy it.
Catching it on a foreign holiday and then returning to work, infecting other people and then going off sick is also going to make you very unpopular.
Catching it after going to the pub, restaurant, gym, cinema or clothes shop or hairdresser in the town where you live and passing it onto others at work would also make you very unpopular.
We cannot stop most of life indefinitely
If someone gets it in this country then there will be doubt as to how they were infected.
If someone gets the symptoms a few days after two weeks in Spain then there's no doubt they caught it on holiday.
And if they then went on to infect multiple other co-workers ...
There will be doubt where they caught it on holiday just as there may be doubt where they caught it in town but in both cases they were out of the house and not in lockdown
If someone gets the symptoms four days after returning from two weeks in Spain then nobody is going to doubt they were infected during their holiday.
Trump is going to turn this into an America First vs China election isn't he? It is going to be brutal as he attempts to portray Biden as some kind of Chinese stooge somehow or other.
It's going to be the dirtiest battle we've ever seen I reckon. Hope the Dems have a massive war room up and running. They need James Carville urgently.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Probably most of them will be rehired by BA next year on lower wages and with fewer perks once air travel picks up.
I would hope though BA executives have also cut their own pay and bonuses first
No they will not.
This is huge and is long term, fundamentally changing the industry.
Travel insurance will also be an issue going forward, as is the prospect of flying itself in an unsafe environment, and even a possible quarantine position
I agree on executive salaries and dividend payments across all business
The action by Airbus tells you all you need to know about the medium term prospects of the aircraft industry
For cruising, I can see travel insurance becoming a compulsory requirement. Thereby excluding the more elderly and ill passengers who travel uninsured and rely on being helilifted off the ship when the worst happens. Which is probably a good thing.
On all the cruises I have been on we had to have travel insurance confirmed before we boarded
They ask you lots of times, but I don’t think there are many cruises where it is actually a compulsory requirement of travel. A peruse of the cruising forums suggest there are a lot of elderly folks who can’t afford the quoted premiums and board willing to take their chances.
Or, rather, for the ship to take their chances for them.
On our cruises we were required to quote the policy number, insurer, and next of kin
The trouble with all the (ABC1, well off, property owning, perhaps older if not retired) let's keep the lockdown until further notice crew is that apart from anything else it lets the government off the hook.
The more they think you are happy with being locked down the less pressure there is on them to do anything about the crisis.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
Palmerston didn't select the Downing Street maids on their ability to dust the drawing room.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
Palmerston didn't select the Downing Street maids on their ability to dust the drawing room.
Or indeed the Queen’s ladies in waiting.
However, he didn’t actually move into Downing Street and live there openly with them.
Similarly with Melbourne, who in addition to multiple affairs with leading society ladies infamously patronised a girls’ orphanage so he would have a supply of teenage children to molest.
Favourite comment on Palmerston, possibly apocryphal but I like to think it’s true:
Young Conservative official runs up to Disraeli: ‘Chancellor! I have important news. We have incontrovertible evidence that Pam has a mistress.’
‘Silence fool,’ snarled Disraeli. ‘If that gets out, he’ll sweep the country.’
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
No, outside parts of Africa people have forgotten how life was with the fickle fear of random death from infectious disease.
Anyone know why? I don't have the sense that overall the news has been particularly positive.
Markets are forward looking; they weigh the expectation of future returns. There have been a couple of pieces of possibly good coronavirus related news this week (possible anti-viral treatment, Oxford vaccine trial going forward) & people are looking through the current mess to the sunlit uplands of the future.
Of course, some might suggest that there’s a long road from tiny trial to successful drug / vaccine & markets are very, very over-optimistic
But that’s the way things work - the price is set by where the pessimists & the optimists meet in the middle.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy
Anyone know why? I don't have the sense that overall the news has been particularly positive.
There is some evidence of European economic recoveries as their lockdowns end. The government caved on loan guarantees for small businesses, so the overall stimulus is likely to be larger. It also looks like bailouts are more likely for big businesses like airlines all over Europe. Finally, some good treatment candidates are appearing, and some people are more confident about vaccines.
It's actually been a good news week overall, whereas the current bad clinical outcomes are reflecting news from 2-4 weeks ago.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
On the contrary, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries frequent quarantines were introduced to limit the spread of infectious diseases. Why did Shakespeare write 150+ sonnets and two long poems? Because all the theatres were shut due to plague and it was the only way he could make money,
Moreover, there was an extremely serious recession in 1920, for which Spanish flu was one cause. It’s been rather overshadowed by the Second Great Depression of the 1930s, and because the world economy rebounded remarkably quickly, but it left a troubled legacy. For example, it severely damaged the coal and cotton industries, already struggling under the impact of the First World War.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
But Margaret Lloyd George did appear in Downing Street from time to time. Stevenson was kept out of view much of the time.
Stevenson was not kept out of view. She even accompanied Lloyd George to official state functions, FFS. One of the reasons the Tory Right, the likes of Stanley Baldwin, Joynson-Hicks and Lloyd-Greame turned against Lloyd George was because they and their constituency parties were angry at DLlG being ‘the first Prime Minister since the Duke of Grafton to live openly with his mistress.‘
This fed into the atmosphere of moral decay around the government epitomised by the blatant sale of honours for Lloyd George’s personal benefit.
If the affair was so open, why did Lloyd George's opponents in Caernarvon Borough not use it against him? The Nonconformist Chapel communities would hardly have taken kindly to it at that time. Beyond that, why did the Asquithians make active use of it?
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
Our economy is very different now, and based on all sorts of fripperies that aren't essential, and can therefore be stopped (voluntarily or otherwise).
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
Mexico is one of the highest-rating countries on the Indulgence dimension of Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions, which is associated with obesity. It scores 97 on this measure.
I'm not sure how much is going to be left of organised professional sports at the end of all of this; it's liable to drag on for so long that, presumably, only those sports that are awash with TV money and/or very conducive to social distancing will be able to keep going.
Darts has already found a novel approach to keeping itself on life support. Premier League football should be able to collect enough revenue from TV money to keep going, and the Championship probably will although some of the weaker clubs are bound to fold. Other candidates for survival include snooker, golf and possibly tennis.
Club rugby, county cricket and lower league football are all fucked. Athletics is also in the mire but, as an individual discipline rather than one reliant on a collection of soon-to-be-bankrupt clubs, should be much easier to start back up when we get to about 2025 and crowds are finally permitted again.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
What is the timescale used ? Is it one week or two or something else ?
Because if we assume Rt is 0.75 then 3 time periods would see the number of infected reduced to 42% of the original whereas 6 time periods would see it reduced to 18%.
I've been using 5 days, on the principle that that's the average incubation period between infection and symptoms. Hopefully, symptomatic people should isolate themselves, so the infections they make will be in that 5 day period. There will always be exceptions, of course, buy by and large that should be about the average, I'd have thought. Could well be wrong, of course.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
But Margaret Lloyd George did appear in Downing Street from time to time. Stevenson was kept out of view much of the time.
Stevenson was not kept out of view. She even accompanied Lloyd George to official state functions, FFS. One of the reasons the Tory Right, the likes of Stanley Baldwin, Joynson-Hicks and Lloyd-Greame turned against Lloyd George was because they and their constituency parties were angry at DLlG being ‘the first Prime Minister since the Duke of Grafton to live openly with his mistress.‘
This fed into the atmosphere of moral decay around the government epitomised by the blatant sale of honours for Lloyd George’s personal benefit.
If the affair was so open, why did Lloyd George's opponents in Caernarvon Borough not use it against him? The Nonconformist Chapel communities would hardly have taken kindly to it at that time. Beyond that, why did the Asquithians make active use of it?
What would be the point? As with Palmerston’s anecdote, what people said and what they actually thought were two different things. For example, when W T Stead campaigned against Charles Dilke in the Forest of Dean on those grounds in the 1890s, Dilke was returned with an increased majority. Hobsbawm noted that one of the enduring features of Welsh social life was a tendency to look the other way over marital indiscretions. Tom Rolt, who was himself living with a divorcee to whom he was not married when he lived in Tywyn, made much the same observation. Most people in Carnarvon, Bangor, Criccieth, Conway, Nefyn and Pwllheli who cared about such things would have known about the affair. Most of them would have been far more interested in the fact that their man was Prime Minister.
I’m assuming you’re missing a ‘not’ in the point on Asquith - but given Asquith was himself a notorious adulterer, of whom Kitchener said acidly ‘The cabinet are hopeless. They blab military secrets to their wives. Except Asquith of course, who blabs them to other people’s wives,’ wouldn’t it have been more than a trifle reckless of them?
The real irony, which you may not be aware of, was that the puritanical opposition rallied around Birkenhead and Beaverbrook, who make Donald Trump and Bill Clinton look like monks.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
My wife has a former student who works in healthcare in CDMX. She just checked in with her and apparently the hospitals there are now only admitting patients with medical insurance. They are right at capacity with nothing to spare if things get worse.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
What's missing is that even in 1919, most people in most of the world just stayed at home and farmed, or cleaned people's houses, or cared for children, usually their own. In 1919, even in the most developed parts of the world, about half of industry was still powered by local power generation like steam from coal, rather than electricity or even oil. It was a different time! It's precisely because we have so much more economic development that we can trade it off against human life. Not to say that the extent is correct, but that's the principle.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
A bigger more leveraged economy will have bigger contractions.
If you can have a single person make millions just sitting at a computer, a feature of the modern economy, then naturally you will have bigger busts when they can't do that.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
What's missing is that even in 1919, most people in most of the world just stayed at home and farmed, or cleaned people's houses, or cared for children, usually their own. In 1919, even in the most developed parts of the world, about half of industry was still powered by local power generation like steam from coal, rather than electricity or even oil. It was a different time! It's precisely because we have so much more economic development that we can trade it off against human life. Not to say that the extent is correct, but that's the principle.
And we're arguably in a better place now than even 10-20 years ago in that so much office work can now be done from home.
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
What's missing is that even in 1919, most people in most of the world just stayed at home and farmed, or cleaned people's houses, or cared for children, usually their own. In 1919, even in the most developed parts of the world, about half of industry was still powered by local power generation like steam from coal, rather than electricity or even oil. It was a different time! It's precisely because we have so much more economic development that we can trade it off against human life. Not to say that the extent is correct, but that's the principle.
And we're arguably in a better place now than even 10-20 years ago in that so much office work can now be done from home.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
What I'd like to know is, what do BBC London think viewers would take from a story about the plight of illegal immigrants?
My thoughts were either this isn't that big an issue, in which case why is this being covered? But if it is a big issue, then why don't the BBC spend more time exposing illegal immigrants and employers who are presumably not paying tax?
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Even without a lockdown people are still not going to travel.
Mexico is pretty much the perfect combination of mobile population, chaotic health care, rampant crime and corruption, weak state control, bad air pollution, and dire poverty.
Eg Mexico City could be NYC multiplied.
They must hope their younger population protects them
Possibly and percentage over 70 and over 80 remains the key indicator of death rate but still though Mexico is slightly above global life expectancy of 73 at 75.
Mexico is one of the highest-rating countries on the Indulgence dimension of Geert Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions, which is associated with obesity. It scores 97 on this measure.
That’s fascinating. Shows how similar the UK is to other English speaking nations, and how dissimilar we are to, say, France
Hence Brexit?
One of the most interesting books I've read in the last 10 years — Culture's Consequences by Geert Hofstede. Sadly he died just a few weeks ago, at the age of 91.
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
This is the case in millions of jobs worldwide
Oh just accept it then right?
you can't get a job in your own industry, you can;t retrain because colleges are locked down, your prospects of a job in another industry are close to zero for years to come because lockdown has smashed every industry, you can;t even meet someone face to face to try to convince them you might be worth employing.
This is your future. An enforced breadline existence you cannot get out of. For years. While some academic argues whether R is at one or not.
That is what millions of moderate and low paid workers in our country face. How long do you or anybody else think we can keep the lid on that? whether Corona deaths are at twenty, fifty or even 100,000?
Who said the lockdown would last years? 🙄
There would be more economic devastation without a lockdown as you'd have had just as much economic devastation as people take their own actions to avoid risk but with zero government support.
The government borrowing for a once-in-a-century pandemic can easier pay for people's wages than the companies that would have gone bust otherwise. We'd have millions unemployed by now not ten thousand in one industry without a lockdown.
The lockdown wont last indefinitely, but the effects of it will last a very long time. 2008 lasted a very long time, and this is much much worse than 2008. The worst slump in centuries according to a BoE policymaker.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The link between economic growth and human behaviour is correct. Ravages by disease have caused recessions and economic changes before.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
The threat to the overall health of the population from this disease is less, surely, than say smallpox in the 18th century. Or Spanish flu in 1919. Or a dozen other outbreaks you could name.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
Its not the only answer.
Through prior centuries in reality health crises did cause lockdowns, quarantines and economic catastrophes.
However also the world is also entirely different now to then. You are missing many differences between now and then. Not least:
1: Service based which can be shut down by people behaving differently. 2: The lack of people working in real essential industries (in the past almost everyone would have been what we now call a key worker). 3: Life expectancy. 4: Expectancy/fear of early death and illness. 5: Education. 6: The internet and instant global communication. 7: 24/7 news media. 8: Air travel and vehicle travel. 9: Demographics. 10: The expectation and acceptability of background diseases in general.
None of that involves the lockdown. That is human attitudes and work that are different now to what they used to be.
What I'd like to know is, what do BBC London think viewers would take from a story about the plight of illegal immigrants?
My thoughts were either this isn't that big an issue, in which case why is this being covered? But if it is a big issue, then why don't the BBC spend more time exposing illegal immigrants and employers who are presumably not paying tax?
My guess is that virtually everyone working for the BBC in London, and most Londoners more generally, are in favour of open door immigration and would therefore be hugely sympathetic to these migrants and regard them as innocent victims.
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Around 8-10%, worldwide. In the US, possibly 17%. In the UK, it was 20%.
(I have more information in my books, but I can’t link to them. Since the Mises Institute is sceptical of lockdown, I hardly think you will accuse them of underestimating the figures.)
What I'd like to know is, what do BBC London think viewers would take from a story about the plight of illegal immigrants?
My thoughts were either this isn't that big an issue, in which case why is this being covered? But if it is a big issue, then why don't the BBC spend more time exposing illegal immigrants and employers who are presumably not paying tax?
Yep - very bad.
I've had some issues with the bbc and have moaned about them, but very sadly i think it is now abundantly clear that they are defunct.
(this is the news bit - no idea of the tv stuff - i don't watch)
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
Lockdown isn't needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life. In all walks of life we are seeing jobs going into stasis via the furlough scheme - without the furlough scheme if we'd taken a complete laissez-faire approach (which is normally what I'd 100% support but this is a once-in-a-century pandemic) then far more would have been sacked already.
Once lockdown ends and furlough ends then hopefully the economy can recover quickly. But with or without a lockdown there is economic carnage and lay-offs either way as people lockdown of their own initiative without any support since its not official.
The point there being that Government is following public opinion as much as leading it.
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
Yes I do.
1920 UK GDP: £6,063.0 million 1921 UK GDP: £4,799.5 million
Germans estimating Rt back at 0.75, so the apparent bounce was seemingly just noise. Probably quite important for our policy-makers.
Probably not. It's given them a great excuse for doing nothing a week Thursday, which is exactly what they wanted to do anyway.
SAGE needs balancing with other risk, behavioural, social and economic advisors.
I'm guessing that we get the publication of a vague plan to ease the lockdown (with no dates in it) before the next review date, and then no change when it actually comes *except* that they'll let the garden centres reopen as a token gesture. We then have another three weeks of waiting, which takes us to the start of June.
Whether bedding plants and an exit plan with no dates for any kind of exit will be enough to stop the lockdown from unravelling of its own accord, who can say?
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
But Margaret Lloyd George did appear in Downing Street from time to time. Stevenson was kept out of view much of the time.
Stevenson was not kept out of view. She even accompanied Lloyd George to official state functions, FFS. One of the reasons the Tory Right, the likes of Stanley Baldwin, Joynson-Hicks and Lloyd-Greame turned against Lloyd George was because they and their constituency parties were angry at DLlG being ‘the first Prime Minister since the Duke of Grafton to live openly with his mistress.‘
This fed into the atmosphere of moral decay around the government epitomised by the blatant sale of honours for Lloyd George’s personal benefit.
If the affair was so open, why did Lloyd George's opponents in Caernarvon Borough not use it against him? The Nonconformist Chapel communities would hardly have taken kindly to it at that time. Beyond that, why did the Asquithians make active use of it?
What would be the point? As with Palmerston’s anecdote, what people said and what they actually thought were two different things. For example, when W T Stead campaigned against Charles Dilke in the Forest of Dean on those grounds in the 1890s, Dilke was returned with an increased majority. Hobsbawm noted that one of the enduring features of Welsh social life was a tendency to look the other way over marital indiscretions. Tom Rolt, who was himself living with a divorcee to whom he was not married when he lived in Tywyn, made much the same observation. Most people in Carnarvon, Bangor, Criccieth, Conway, Nefyn and Pwllheli who cared about such things would have known about the affair. Most of them would have been far more interested in the fact that their man was Prime Minister.
I’m assuming you’re missing a ‘not’ in the point on Asquith - but given Asquith was himself a notorious adulterer, of whom Kitchener said acidly ‘The cabinet are hopeless. They blab military secrets to their wives. Except Asquith of course, who blabs them to other people’s wives,’ wouldn’t it have been more than a trifle reckless of them?
The real irony, which you may not be aware of, was that the puritanical opposition rallied around Birkenhead and Beaverbrook, who make Donald Trump and Bill Clinton look like monks.
Asquith was well known for his affair with Venetia Stanley but it is not clear that the relationship was physically consummated.
Short-term, working from home for most office type jobs will be fine. But personally I find it's no substitute for being able to go into the office, least of all because over time - even the relatively short number of weeks we've had so far - the lines of communication get stretched really badly. Individual small teams might be able to work round it with teleconferences and Zoom and Teams but I'm finding that, the team I'm in, our interactions with others teams have dropped to near-zero. Everything just suddenly feels like such a distance, teams the floor above you whom you might have irregular, rare but necessary contact with suddenly feel like they may as well be on Mars for all you know what they're up to now.
In a big organisation I wonder how this will play out over a longer period.
I also wonder what it will do for the dreaded management bullshit speak of "employee engagement". It's hard to feel engaged when you haven't seen your office or your colleagues or your bosses for a while .Your entire number-crunching spreadsheet career suddenly feels a lot more abstract and pointless the moment you're doing it entirely from home. It was probably already abstract anyway, yes, but working from home just amplifies that fact somehow.
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful I can do it when otherwise I might be totally stuffed like many others are, but hopefully, even if we can't medium term get back to normal, we can at least rotate stuff so that folk might work from home half the week and go to the office the other half or such-like.
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
I think human life as we know it is at an end. We will be living like this for years, maybe forever. I am questioning seriously whether I can live out my life in this enforced isolation.
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
I think human life as we know it is at an end. We will be living like this for years, maybe forever. I am questioning seriously whether I can live out my life in this enforced isolation.
No chance.
Isolation while we flatten the curve and build up NHS capacity, testing and tracking/tracing capacity and PPE capacity makes sense.
Once capacity is up there is zero reason to maintain the lockdown.
Its worth noting that in America before statewide lockdowns were announced millions were already added to the unemployment rolls.
Any idea that economic carnage now would be avoided without a lockdown is completely farcical. As is any idea that any government borrowing now (for a once-in-a-century pandemic) would cripple the government expenditure, that is also economically illiterate.
Absolutely.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
Sorry where is your evidence for that assertion that its happened that way in previous pandemics?
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
That’s an interesting article, although maybe a bit tunnel visioned. It sometimes feels a bit Basil Fawlty in its approach.
I suspect one of the after effects of this pandemic will be an upsurge in research on how the flu pandemic caused economic damage. Already, it’s being much more frequently spoken about than even three months ago.
» show previous quotes Death rate is actually pretty flat if you take the weekend effects out by looking at the 7 day average (look at the graph for New Daily Deaths Comparisons). One could just as well argue that the Scots got the death rate increase under control earlier but it's flatlining [edited]. But I don't really know!
Someone below (can't relocate it, sorry) was claiming a double the English death rate pro rata below. But the figures are nothing like that level of difference. There is (now) a small excess over the English figure, but I don't know enough about the procedural and recording differences which could well explain it.
You don't see too many comparisons but last one I saw had Scotland significantly lower than England per head of population but they will not really want to bandy it about much. Whether with our later peak we are catching up a bit but still about 250 per million versus England's 350 per million. This is a good site, or looks like it to me, I am sure some expert will say it is crap. https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/
Hello, Malky, hope you got some rain for the garden this day. I've been looking at that site too - I find it much easier to understand with its weekly smoothing than the raw daily figures.
BBC London News reporting the dilemma for illegal immigrants during lockdown.
The BBC is totally toast in my view following this crisis.
Or at least the news bit is.
but it is a problem, and ought to be aired. You cannot choose to hear the news you want to hear unless you employ the off button selectively, or decline to watch TV.
Germans estimating Rt back at 0.75, so the apparent bounce was seemingly just noise. Probably quite important for our policy-makers.
Probably not. It's given them a great excuse for doing nothing a week Thursday, which is exactly what they wanted to do anyway.
SAGE needs balancing with other risk, behavioural, social and economic advisors.
I'm guessing that we get the publication of a vague plan to ease the lockdown (with no dates in it) before the next review date, and then no change when it actually comes *except* that they'll let the garden centres reopen as a token gesture. We then have another three weeks of waiting, which takes us to the start of June.
Whether bedding plants and an exit plan with no dates for any kind of exit will be enough to stop the lockdown from unravelling of its own accord, who can say?
I've not seen any comparison with the Scottish proposal document (and the Welsh equivalent if it is out?).
Short-term, working from home for most office type jobs will be fine. But personally I find it's no substitute for being able to go into the office, least of all because over time - even the relatively short number of weeks we've had so far - the lines of communication get stretched really badly. Individual small teams might be able to work round it with teleconferences and Zoom and Teams but I'm finding that, the team I'm in, our interactions with others teams have dropped to near-zero. Everything just suddenly feels like such a distance, teams the floor above you whom you might have irregular, rare but necessary contact with suddenly feel like they may as well be on Mars for all you know what they're up to now.
In a big organisation I wonder how this will play out over a longer period.
I also wonder what it will do for the dreaded management bullshit speak of "employee engagement". It's hard to feel engaged when you haven't seen your office or your colleagues or your bosses for a while .Your entire number-crunching spreadsheet career suddenly feels a lot more abstract and pointless the moment you're doing it entirely from home. It was probably already abstract anyway, yes, but working from home just amplifies that fact somehow.
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful I can do it when otherwise I might be totally stuffed like many others are, but hopefully, even if we can't medium term get back to normal, we can at least rotate stuff so that folk might work from home half the week and go to the office the other half or such-like.
Going forward I think the approach is obviously going to vary according to how effective employers find WFH to be and how much money it saves them. You'll get some companies that will dispense entirely with centralised offices, others that will keep small premises to use to hold periodic meetings, some will want to operate more in the manner that you describe (part-time working in the office and part-time at home,) and some businesses - though I would guess only a minority - will want everyone back in the office as soon as social distancing ends or they can find enough space to work around it.
My husband's office has everyone working from home at the moment, but latest news is that they're looking at how many employees they can accommodate whilst sticking to the distancing rules and that this is likely to lead to rotation of staff in and out (albeit that he personally will probably be stuck at home for the duration on account of his asthma.) However, no movement in that direction likely until June at the earliest.
Interesting to note the transport usage slide from today's Government briefing showing car usage creeping back above 40% - since Easter the weekday traffic level had crept up slightly week on week. Public transport usage remains very low - the London Underground up very slightly but less than 10% of normal with rail travel almost moribund.
This must be a disaster for the train operators who are running empty trains up and down the lines - I suppose those who have already paid for their journeys with season tickets might feel aggrieved but presumably there are compensation schemes in place.
Mr Johnson, 55, and Ms Symonds, 32, announced in March that they were expecting a baby in "early summer", and that they had become engaged at the end of last year. They are the first unmarried couple to move into Downing Street together.
An exasperated David Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson wave hello.
But Margaret Lloyd George did appear in Downing Street from time to time. Stevenson was kept out of view much of the time.
Stevenson was not kept out of view. She even accompanied Lloyd George to official state functions, FFS. One of the reasons the Tory Right, the likes of Stanley Baldwin, Joynson-Hicks and Lloyd-Greame turned against Lloyd George was because they and their constituency parties were angry at DLlG being ‘the first Prime Minister since the Duke of Grafton to live openly with his mistress.‘
This fed into the atmosphere of moral decay around the government epitomised by the blatant sale of honours for Lloyd George’s personal benefit.
If the affair was so open, why did Lloyd George's opponents in Caernarvon Borough not use it against him? The Nonconformist Chapel communities would hardly have taken kindly to it at that time. Beyond that, why did the Asquithians make active use of it?
What would be the point? As with Palmerston’s anecdote, what people said and what they actually thought were two different things. For example, when W T Stead campaigned against Charles Dilke in the Forest of Dean on those grounds in the 1890s, Dilke was returned with an increased majority. Hobsbawm noted that one of the enduring features of Welsh social life was a tendency to look the other way over marital indiscretions. Tom Rolt, who was himself living with a divorcee to whom he was not married when he lived in Tywyn, made much the same observation. Most people in Carnarvon, Bangor, Criccieth, Conway, Nefyn and Pwllheli who cared about such things would have known about the affair. Most of them would have been far more interested in the fact that their man was Prime Minister.
I’m assuming you’re missing a ‘not’ in the point on Asquith - but given Asquith was himself a notorious adulterer, of whom Kitchener said acidly ‘The cabinet are hopeless. They blab military secrets to their wives. Except Asquith of course, who blabs them to other people’s wives,’ wouldn’t it have been more than a trifle reckless of them?
The real irony, which you may not be aware of, was that the puritanical opposition rallied around Birkenhead and Beaverbrook, who make Donald Trump and Bill Clinton look like monks.
Asquith was well known for his affair with Venetia Stanley but it is not clear that the relationship was physically consummated.
Do you not realise that she was one of many? She was the most famous primarily because Asquith had a long standing infatuation with her, and wrote to her so often with the letters surviving. But from about 1907 onwards young women were advised not to be alone with him because he was a ‘groper.’
Of course you may argue that’s not ‘physical consummation’ but even if it stopped at inappropriate touching it would have made it rather difficult to attack Lloyd George for marital infidelity.
ICL model infection update looks a bit more positive for us now - daily infection count coming down by 5.7% per day. If that continues we'll be at 2k/day start of June (vs peak 264k/day pre-lockdown, and 79k a few days after).
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
I think human life as we know it is at an end. We will be living like this for years, maybe forever. I am questioning seriously whether I can live out my life in this enforced isolation.
No chance.
Isolation while we flatten the curve and build up NHS capacity, testing and tracking/tracing capacity and PPE capacity makes sense.
Once capacity is up there is zero reason to maintain the lockdown.
That’s not what the Government is saying. They say there has to be no chance of a second wave. That will never happen. Living in this half existence forever is simply not worth it. It’s not even living, it’s existing. There is no hope.
Individual small teams might be able to work round it with teleconferences and Zoom and Teams but I'm finding that, the team I'm in, our interactions with others teams have dropped to near-zero. Everything just suddenly feels like such a distance, teams the floor above you whom you might have irregular, rare but necessary contact with suddenly feel like they may as well be on Mars for all you know what they're up to now.
I guess it depends on the pre-existing culture. The company I work for has a philosophy of the basic work unit being small, multi-skilled, self-managing "squads" with structured relationships with other teams and cross-squad by discipline. We seem to be doing pretty well with no major differences to interaction that I can see. The only big adjustment we've made is moving back to video-conferenced daily standups so we can have face-time with each other at least once a day. Formerly in the office we were doing daily updates on Slack as finding a room for stand-up every day was a nuisance.
BBC London News reporting the dilemma for illegal immigrants during lockdown.
The BBC is totally toast in my view following this crisis.
Or at least the news bit is.
but it is a problem, and ought to be aired. You cannot choose to hear the news you want to hear unless you employ the off button selectively, or decline to watch TV.
I rarely hear the news I want to hear. That's not an issue at all.
I hear little reporting on the news either. What happened?
The whole meme of actually just saying what you saw as objectively as possible seems to have vanished.
BBC London News reporting the dilemma for illegal immigrants during lockdown.
The BBC is totally toast in my view following this crisis.
Or at least the news bit is.
but it is a problem, and ought to be aired. You cannot choose to hear the news you want to hear unless you employ the off button selectively, or decline to watch TV.
Says who? There are a lot of people suffering problems at the moment. The plight of a few - and I assume it is only a few - people who have been dodging tax really is not high on the priority list.
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
I think human life as we know it is at an end. We will be living like this for years, maybe forever. I am questioning seriously whether I can live out my life in this enforced isolation.
No chance.
Isolation while we flatten the curve and build up NHS capacity, testing and tracking/tracing capacity and PPE capacity makes sense.
Once capacity is up there is zero reason to maintain the lockdown.
That’s not what the Government is saying. They say there has to be no chance of a second wave. That will never happen. Living in this half existence forever is simply not worth it. It’s not even living, it’s existing. There is no hope.
They're saying there has to be no chance of a second wave that will overwhelm the NHS.
Once we have flattened the curve, upgraded NHS capacity, upgraded testing capacity, upgraded testing and tracking/tracity capacity and upgraded PPE capacity then there would be no chance of that.
Just heard from another of my wife's friends, this time in Munich (a perk of being a TOEFL teacher is getting friendships with former students all over the world) that after shops re-opened there recently, cases have shot back up again and they may have to go back to a lockdown.
I think human life as we know it is at an end. We will be living like this for years, maybe forever. I am questioning seriously whether I can live out my life in this enforced isolation.
No chance.
Isolation while we flatten the curve and build up NHS capacity, testing and tracking/tracing capacity and PPE capacity makes sense.
Once capacity is up there is zero reason to maintain the lockdown.
That’s not what the Government is saying. They say there has to be no chance of a second wave. That will never happen. Living in this half existence forever is simply not worth it. It’s not even living, it’s existing. There is no hope.
They're saying there has to be no chance of a second wave that will overwhelm the NHS.
Once we have flattened the curve, upgraded NHS capacity, upgraded testing capacity, upgraded testing and tracking/tracity capacity and upgraded PPE capacity then there would be no chance of that.
That small change to point 5 of the PowerPoint slide was flatly contradicted by Raab today. Listening to him today convinced me that is really no reason to continue. It’s over.
So Mr Raab what do you say to a sacked BA worker today?
Well persisting with lockdown measures means the economy is going to be completely smashed to pieces for years to come so the the chances of re-employment at a decent standard are very low for a long period ahead.
We forecast that for the foreseeable future you'll be having a totally rotten life on meagre benefits due to our enormous debt, with poorer public services.
Now, back to those PPE supply problems Piers Morgan is so concerned about.
Don't be an idiot. Countries all across the entire globe have stopped air travel, the BA workers would have been laid off with or without a domestic lockdown.
In fact without a domestic lockdown causing a domestic furlough scheme its likely all airlines would have sacked even more workers already.
OK I'll put that question to YOU since I'm such an idiot.
What would YOU say to a sacked BA worker today?
retrain in another industry? when Lockdown is needlessly destroying jobs in all walks of life?
These poor people must be in a world of sh8t. No jobs in their industry. No jobs anywhere else either.
How many extra deaths would you accept to end lockdown ?
Under 50s have a less than 0.5% death rate from Covid, now we are passed the peak most of the workforce can get back to work with no likely significant rise in deathrate.
Just get mass testing up and advise over 70s to stay indoors unless absolutely necessary to travel or go outside
The Trump school of dealing with the crisis on view
No, the common sense view, as you are over 80 and retired you might want to stay indoors longer but for most young people in the workforce there is very little risk of dying from Covid
You are far more like Trump then you may want to admit.
And I am not over 80
Even more like Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the architects of Obamacare:
Q: What’s wrong with simply enjoying an extended life?
A: These people who live a vigorous life to 70, 80, 90 years of age—when I look at what those people “do,” almost all of it is what I classify as play. It’s not meaningful work. They’re riding motorcycles; they’re hiking. Which can all have value—don’t get me wrong. But if it’s the main thing in your life? Ummm, that’s not probably a meaningful life.
Part of his argument for why people over the age of 75 shouldn't get healthcare.
Americans do have a habit of thinking that life is working, Italians that life is eating.
Comments
If someone gets the symptoms a few days after two weeks in Spain then there's no doubt they caught it on holiday.
And if they then went on to infect multiple other co-workers ...
Or, rather, for the ship to take their chances for them.
There must be a happy medium.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8269159/White-House-orders-intelligence-investigation-prove-China-covered-coronavirus-threat.html
It's going to be the dirtiest battle we've ever seen I reckon. Hope the Dems have a massive war room up and running. They need James Carville urgently.
Centuries when our country has been ravaged by disease much worse than Corona yet somehow kept going. Kept growing. How can that be if your link between economic growth and disease is correct?
It clearly isn't.
The more they think you are happy with being locked down the less pressure there is on them to do anything about the crisis.
They have you where they want you.
You are mistakenly (despite repeated comments to the contrary) applying all economic consequences to the lockdown. That is a nonsense. In nations and states without lockdowns there have been just as devastating economic consequences as people react on their own acccord.
The effects of this could last less than 2008. 2008 was about structural problems that took years to fix. This is not about structural flaws in the economy.
Obviously the definition of report here is different to the Govt "reporting" this for the first time today.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/882243/2020-04-29_COVID-19_Press_Conference_Slides.pdf
However, he didn’t actually move into Downing Street and live there openly with them.
Similarly with Melbourne, who in addition to multiple affairs with leading society ladies infamously patronised a girls’ orphanage so he would have a supply of teenage children to molest.
Favourite comment on Palmerston, possibly apocryphal but I like to think it’s true:
Young Conservative official runs up to Disraeli: ‘Chancellor! I have important news. We have incontrovertible evidence that Pam has a mistress.’
‘Silence fool,’ snarled Disraeli. ‘If that gets out, he’ll sweep the country.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8270245/Japanese-island-hit-second-wave-coronavirus-ending-lockdown-early.html
Anyone know why? I don't have the sense that overall the news has been particularly positive.
And yet the recession we will get this time is much more severe than the outbreaks at all of those times. All of them. Every one.
What's missing here? Human behaviour? people have always been scared of disease
What's missing is the policy response of the government. We have never locked down, deliberately smashed our economy or restricted the movement of healthy citizens. Especially those under 50.
Its the only answer.
Epidemics change behaviour.
Of course, some might suggest that there’s a long road from tiny trial to successful drug / vaccine & markets are very, very over-optimistic
But that’s the way things work - the price is set by where the pessimists & the optimists meet in the middle.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/04/28/against-second-great-depression-will-global-economy-pull-brink/
It's actually been a good news week overall, whereas the current bad clinical outcomes are reflecting news from 2-4 weeks ago.
Moreover, there was an extremely serious recession in 1920, for which Spanish flu was one cause. It’s been rather overshadowed by the Second Great Depression of the 1930s, and because the world economy rebounded remarkably quickly, but it left a troubled legacy. For example, it severely damaged the coal and cotton industries, already struggling under the impact of the First World War.
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/
"Indulgence:
In countries with enough food, higher percentages of obese people"
https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=orpc
Darts has already found a novel approach to keeping itself on life support. Premier League football should be able to collect enough revenue from TV money to keep going, and the Championship probably will although some of the weaker clubs are bound to fold. Other candidates for survival include snooker, golf and possibly tennis.
Club rugby, county cricket and lower league football are all fucked. Athletics is also in the mire but, as an individual discipline rather than one reliant on a collection of soon-to-be-bankrupt clubs, should be much easier to start back up when we get to about 2025 and crowds are finally permitted again.
Hopefully, symptomatic people should isolate themselves, so the infections they make will be in that 5 day period.
There will always be exceptions, of course, buy by and large that should be about the average, I'd have thought. Could well be wrong, of course.
I’m assuming you’re missing a ‘not’ in the point on Asquith - but given Asquith was himself a notorious adulterer, of whom Kitchener said acidly ‘The cabinet are hopeless. They blab military secrets to their wives. Except Asquith of course, who blabs them to other people’s wives,’ wouldn’t it have been more than a trifle reckless of them?
The real irony, which you may not be aware of, was that the puritanical opposition rallied around Birkenhead and Beaverbrook, who make Donald Trump and Bill Clinton look like monks.
If you can have a single person make millions just sitting at a computer, a feature of the modern economy, then naturally you will have bigger busts when they can't do that.
In fact, economic carnage could well be worse without a lockdown - it's happened that way in previous pandemics.
If the Swedish method incurs 4-5 times as many deaths as going with a lockdown (wet finger guess based on this morning's work), then that's 4-5 times as many people that are no longer economically active at all - either on the demand side or the supply side. And you still incur major economic damage during the quasi-not-quite-lockdown period (as pointed out, not many people are going on any airlines, anyway, and much economic activity has to cease under their current level of restrictios).
Under the lockdown method, those "excess deaths" will spring back into the economy later, fuelling a greater bounceback (from a greater trough).
As people say "don't judge the Swedish method until it's all over for everyone" on deaths - we should also not judge the Swedish method until it's all over, either. It's very possible that the lockdown method would end up being the least economically damaging in the long run as well (and that's why loads of economists are still recommending it, regardless of contrarian's energetic advice otherwise)
My point was that journalists failing to understand the basics around how the reporting works is just business as usual.
https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country/mexico/
https://sites.psu.edu/global/2017/03/18/la-cultura-de-mexicana/
Or at least the news bit is.
Work that can be done from home
Work that doesn't really need doing
Quite a big overlap
What I'd like to know is, what do BBC London think viewers would take from a story about the plight of illegal immigrants?
My thoughts were either this isn't that big an issue, in which case why is this being covered? But if it is a big issue, then why don't the BBC spend more time exposing illegal immigrants and employers who are presumably not paying tax?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Hofstede
How much did the world economy shrink in 1919/1920 for example? or the UK economy? do you have the numbers?
Can you link an outbreak of smallpox, polio or any other disease to a contraction in the UK economy in the last three centuries?
Through prior centuries in reality health crises did cause lockdowns, quarantines and economic catastrophes.
However also the world is also entirely different now to then. You are missing many differences between now and then. Not least:
1: Service based which can be shut down by people behaving differently.
2: The lack of people working in real essential industries (in the past almost everyone would have been what we now call a key worker).
3: Life expectancy.
4: Expectancy/fear of early death and illness.
5: Education.
6: The internet and instant global communication.
7: 24/7 news media.
8: Air travel and vehicle travel.
9: Demographics.
10: The expectation and acceptability of background diseases in general.
None of that involves the lockdown. That is human attitudes and work that are different now to what they used to be.
More here: https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920
(I have more information in my books, but I can’t link to them. Since the Mises Institute is sceptical of lockdown, I hardly think you will accuse them of underestimating the figures.)
I've had some issues with the bbc and have moaned about them, but very sadly i think it is now abundantly clear that they are defunct.
(this is the news bit - no idea of the tv stuff - i don't watch)
SAGE needs balancing with other risk, behavioural, social and economic advisors.
1920 UK GDP: £6,063.0 million
1921 UK GDP: £4,799.5 million
Whether bedding plants and an exit plan with no dates for any kind of exit will be enough to stop the lockdown from unravelling of its own accord, who can say?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3561560
Opening of smaller non-essential shops and of course garden centres subject to social distancing measures
A relaxation to social distancing within houses to allow family members in different residences to meet
To apply from 11 May.
Partial reopening of schools 1 June
Restaurants, gyms and possibly pubs with restrictions 22 June
Relaxation of restrictions 12 July
These are all at three week intervals and will be subject to ongoing assessment against the 5 tests
In a big organisation I wonder how this will play out over a longer period.
I also wonder what it will do for the dreaded management bullshit speak of "employee engagement". It's hard to feel engaged when you haven't seen your office or your colleagues or your bosses for a while .Your entire number-crunching spreadsheet career suddenly feels a lot more abstract and pointless the moment you're doing it entirely from home. It was probably already abstract anyway, yes, but working from home just amplifies that fact somehow.
Don't get me wrong, I'm grateful I can do it when otherwise I might be totally stuffed like many others are, but hopefully, even if we can't medium term get back to normal, we can at least rotate stuff so that folk might work from home half the week and go to the office the other half or such-like.
Isolation while we flatten the curve and build up NHS capacity, testing and tracking/tracing capacity and PPE capacity makes sense.
Once capacity is up there is zero reason to maintain the lockdown.
I suspect one of the after effects of this pandemic will be an upsurge in research on how the flu pandemic caused economic damage. Already, it’s being much more frequently spoken about than even three months ago.
have they considered, erm... the Army?
My husband's office has everyone working from home at the moment, but latest news is that they're looking at how many employees they can accommodate whilst sticking to the distancing rules and that this is likely to lead to rotation of staff in and out (albeit that he personally will probably be stuck at home for the duration on account of his asthma.) However, no movement in that direction likely until June at the earliest.
Interesting to note the transport usage slide from today's Government briefing showing car usage creeping back above 40% - since Easter the weekday traffic level had crept up slightly week on week. Public transport usage remains very low - the London Underground up very slightly but less than 10% of normal with rail travel almost moribund.
This must be a disaster for the train operators who are running empty trains up and down the lines - I suppose those who have already paid for their journeys with season tickets might feel aggrieved but presumably there are compensation schemes in place.
Of course you may argue that’s not ‘physical consummation’ but even if it stopped at inappropriate touching it would have made it rather difficult to attack Lloyd George for marital infidelity.
I hear little reporting on the news either. What happened?
The whole meme of actually just saying what you saw as objectively as possible seems to have vanished.
Once we have flattened the curve, upgraded NHS capacity, upgraded testing capacity, upgraded testing and tracking/tracity capacity and upgraded PPE capacity then there would be no chance of that.