Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden’s VP pick: The case for Kamala Harris

135

Comments

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?

    Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
    The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.

    Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    IshmaelZ said:

    matt said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.

    Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.
    15 August is VJ in Europe and Africa. That is when they celebrated the surrender. The USA apparently celebrates in Sep as that is when the formal treaty was signed. If we followed that we should celebrate the end of WW1 as being when Versailles was signed, but that treaty is nothing to celebrate.
    Yes but is the point valid? Had Boris said in mid April VE Day was being cancelled and everything would happen on VJ Day, would anyone have objected? We could have moved the Bank Holiday to the 14th August which is during summer holidays anyway.

    Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.
    The problem you face is that people don’t really know about VJ (it’s forgotten, yes I know). VE ties into a national mythology which is at best objectively dubious but is real for many. It also, if one is being cynical, ties into Brexit and the standing alone but ultimately being victorious and special, which seems to have its own mystique got the government’s supporters.
    Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.
    The bombings of Hamburg in 1943 were quite unpleasant in consequence. As was Dresden (we have an airforce and were going to use it). There’s plenty that’s dubious in any war, why choose those?
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Nazism was a a failed ideology.....it was going to collapse at some point...a bit like Soviet communism (although they are not the same).....
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413

    It wasn’t long ago that some PBers were berating other posters for taking a drive in the countryside on their own because they “might break down”.

    I'll repeat that right now. I couldn't give a feck if dickheads want to increase their risk of infection.

    What I do object to is that if infected they then increase the risk of everyone they encounter. And that includes the doctors and nurses they would expect to treat them if they need to be hospitalised.
    What are the chances of someone’s car breaking down on a local drive?
    Higher than if they don't make the unnecessary journey.

    And it isn't about 1 person's car. It is about the statistical probably of breakdowns across a population.

    But I guess you already know that really.
    I’m asking a question. What are the risks associated with people going for local drives?

    I don’t have a car so I don’t know.
    I don't have a car either. Aside from the breakdown accident already covered, one problem is where are they driving to?
    If it is local it will be to one of a handful of local amenities or beauty spots.
    Thus creating a crowd.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    matt said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    matt said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.

    Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.
    15 August is VJ in Europe and Africa. That is when they celebrated the surrender. The USA apparently celebrates in Sep as that is when the formal treaty was signed. If we followed that we should celebrate the end of WW1 as being when Versailles was signed, but that treaty is nothing to celebrate.
    Yes but is the point valid? Had Boris said in mid April VE Day was being cancelled and everything would happen on VJ Day, would anyone have objected? We could have moved the Bank Holiday to the 14th August which is during summer holidays anyway.

    Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.
    The problem you face is that people don’t really know about VJ (it’s forgotten, yes I know). VE ties into a national mythology which is at best objectively dubious but is real for many. It also, if one is being cynical, ties into Brexit and the standing alone but ultimately being victorious and special, which seems to have its own mystique got the government’s supporters.
    Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.
    The bombings of Hamburg in 1943 were quite unpleasant in consequence. As was Dresden (we have an airforce and were going to use it). There’s plenty that’s dubious in any war, why choose those?
    The Japanese surrendered as a direct consequence of those atomic bombings. Not so for the Germans.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    IshmaelZ said:

    matt said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.

    Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.
    15 August is VJ in Europe and Africa. That is when they celebrated the surrender. The USA apparently celebrates in Sep as that is when the formal treaty was signed. If we followed that we should celebrate the end of WW1 as being when Versailles was signed, but that treaty is nothing to celebrate.
    Yes but is the point valid? Had Boris said in mid April VE Day was being cancelled and everything would happen on VJ Day, would anyone have objected? We could have moved the Bank Holiday to the 14th August which is during summer holidays anyway.

    Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.
    The problem you face is that people don’t really know about VJ (it’s forgotten, yes I know). VE ties into a national mythology which is at best objectively dubious but is real for many. It also, if one is being cynical, ties into Brexit and the standing alone but ultimately being victorious and special, which seems to have its own mystique got the government’s supporters.
    Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.
    I'd also say that the 'passionate' feelings that people use to have about the Japanese (certainly held by my older now dead relatives) appear to have died down. Ironically things now seem a bit more spicy in certain quarters when it comes to Germany.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898

    Off Topic

    ***** Betting Post *****
    Referring back to Robert Smithson's excellent header a couple of days ago when he considered the Democrats' chances of winning back control of the Senate, he concluded by stating:
    "All in all, I think the Democrats have a comfortably better than 50% chance of getting to 50 seats (including Independents). It’s also possible they have a blow out night, picking up both Georgia seats and Iowa. You can sell 51 or more Republican seats at slightly worse than evens on Smarkets, and get only marginally worse returns with Betfred and Ladbrokes. Take them."

    As is invariably the case on this supposedly first and foremost betting site, his highly informative and sound recommendations went largely unheeded ... little wonder that I and most other punters like me can no longer be bothered to post our betting ideas on PB.com, only to be met by a wall of indifference.

    That's good value in my book, but DYOR.

    Apologies for cutting part of your erudite response, my friend.

    I confess I miss my racing and while I've become quite fond of Will Rogers Downs and Fonner Park, I can't get on with quarter horse racing at Remington.

    France back on Monday and I'm going to oppose Tropbeau in the Grotte and go with the Freedy head daughter of Kingman.

    Unless Boris gives a very strong steer, I suspect no UK racing this month which will cause the BHA a lot of problems.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Thats the disease that Foxy posted about previously - there are instances in several US states and on the European mainland now
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720
    rcs1000 said:

    @BigRich

    How concerned are you about the reports of serious long-term side effects from CV-19, in particular renal and heart failure?

    "Many people think COVID-19 kills 1% of patients, and the rest get away with some flulike symptoms. But the story gets more complicated. Many people will be left with chronic kidney and heart problems. Even their neural system is disrupted. There will be hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, possibly more, who will need treatments such as renal dialysis for the rest of their lives."

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/finally-virus-got-me-scientist-who-fought-ebola-and-hiv-reflects-facing-death-covid-19

    Increasingly Covid-19 is being seen as a vascular disease, with the clotting disturbance driving renal failure, systemic hypotension and even micro pulmonary embolism worsening hypoxia.

    How much respiratory, cardiac and renal disease is long term is as yet unknown, but probably mostly a substantial deterioration in existing disease.

    The Kawasaki like vasculitis in children is seemingly not very rare. We now some very sick children in Leicester, and recalling staff from redeployment to adult wards.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127

    It wasn’t long ago that some PBers were berating other posters for taking a drive in the countryside on their own because they “might break down”.

    I'll repeat that right now. I couldn't give a feck if dickheads want to increase their risk of infection.

    What I do object to is that if infected they then increase the risk of everyone they encounter. And that includes the doctors and nurses they would expect to treat them if they need to be hospitalised.
    What are the chances of someone’s car breaking down on a local drive?
    Higher than if they don't make the unnecessary journey.

    And it isn't about 1 person's car. It is about the statistical probably of breakdowns across a population.

    But I guess you already know that really.
    I’m asking a question. What are the risks associated with people going for local drives?

    I don’t have a car so I don’t know.
    RTAs, largely, which divert resources.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?

    Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
    Even in Western Europe the Nazis only really controlled the cities at its height....
    It would have been like the Soviets in Afghanistan....progressively getting degraded...
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    matt said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    matt said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.

    Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.
    15 August is VJ in Europe and Africa. That is when they celebrated the surrender. The USA apparently celebrates in Sep as that is when the formal treaty was signed. If we followed that we should celebrate the end of WW1 as being when Versailles was signed, but that treaty is nothing to celebrate.
    Yes but is the point valid? Had Boris said in mid April VE Day was being cancelled and everything would happen on VJ Day, would anyone have objected? We could have moved the Bank Holiday to the 14th August which is during summer holidays anyway.

    Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.
    The problem you face is that people don’t really know about VJ (it’s forgotten, yes I know). VE ties into a national mythology which is at best objectively dubious but is real for many. It also, if one is being cynical, ties into Brexit and the standing alone but ultimately being victorious and special, which seems to have its own mystique got the government’s supporters.
    Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.
    The bombings of Hamburg in 1943 were quite unpleasant in consequence. As was Dresden (we have an airforce and were going to use it). There’s plenty that’s dubious in any war, why choose those?
    Because effect followed cause so immediately in Japan (Aug. 6, 9, 15). I am not saying Dresden was any more or less horrible than Hiroshima, but it wasn't so directly responsible for the result.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Floater said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?

    Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
    The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.

    Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport
    And, unintentionally, most of their nuclear secrets.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Another good geographical comparison - Maine vs New Brunswick:
    https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/05/09/how-new-brunswick-stopped-covid-19/#
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @BigRich

    How concerned are you about the reports of serious long-term side effects from CV-19, in particular renal and heart failure?

    "Many people think COVID-19 kills 1% of patients, and the rest get away with some flulike symptoms. But the story gets more complicated. Many people will be left with chronic kidney and heart problems. Even their neural system is disrupted. There will be hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, possibly more, who will need treatments such as renal dialysis for the rest of their lives."

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/finally-virus-got-me-scientist-who-fought-ebola-and-hiv-reflects-facing-death-covid-19

    Increasingly Covid-19 is being seen as a vascular disease, with the clotting disturbance driving renal failure, systemic hypotension and even micro pulmonary embolism worsening hypoxia.

    How much respiratory, cardiac and renal disease is long term is as yet unknown, but probably mostly a substantial deterioration in existing disease.

    The Kawasaki like vasculitis in children is seemingly not very rare. We now some very sick children in Leicester, and recalling staff from redeployment to adult wards.
    That is what my wife says...it is a vascular disease which is why the highest fatality is with dementia....and it impacts on the elderly....

    And that is why too many people who survive it will need long term therapies....

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Floater said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?

    Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
    The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.

    Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport
    We supplied a lot of crucial equipment TO russian in 41. Something like 1 in 10 tanks defending Moscow were British.

    Whilst the absolute numbers of the material we sent is small the exact time we went it was utterly crucial.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    My apologies.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/boris-johnson-sided-doves-over-hawks-lockdown
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    There are no good choices....
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    Not for pensioners or people paid by the state, they’ll be fine.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    Scott_xP said:
    That's a fascinating read and if accurate suggests quite a split at the heart of the Conservative Party.

    I wonder if his own experience has tempered Boris's line - I've no idea.

    I do agree some of the print media (notably the Telegraph) have taken an increasingly strong anti-lockdown line. I've not seen any figures on sales - I assume they are well down which won't be good for any of the papers. I don't know why they kept printing.

    They have tried to bounce the Government into a rapid easing of restrictions but Boris isn't playing ball and the rift between him and Sunak on this is going to be interesting as the fall guy for the economic bad news is going to be Sunak whose current stratospheric ratings may not endure.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    We are not going to be locked in.....we are just going to have live it sensibly....which means no mass gatherings I would imagine....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    tyson said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    We are not going to be locked in.....we are just going to have live it sensibly....which means no mass gatherings I would imagine....
    We'll see. I think you are way too pessimistic.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    tyson said:

    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    There are no good choices....
    There are choices for the long term and for the short term. I’m am unconvinced that hoping something turns up is a choice but if everyone else is doing it, as politician you lose nothing by going with the flow..
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    matt said:

    tyson said:

    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    There are no good choices....
    There are choices for the long term and for the short term. I’m am unconvinced that hoping something turns up is a choice but if everyone else is doing it, as politician you lose nothing by going with the flow..
    Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.

    When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Mortimer said:

    matt said:

    tyson said:

    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    There are no good choices....
    There are choices for the long term and for the short term. I’m am unconvinced that hoping something turns up is a choice but if everyone else is doing it, as politician you lose nothing by going with the flow..
    Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.

    When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.
    Have there been any updates from the Oxford boffins?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,878
    RobD said:

    matt said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    matt said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.

    Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.
    15 August is VJ in Europe and Africa. That is when they celebrated the surrender. The USA apparently celebrates in Sep as that is when the formal treaty was signed. If we followed that we should celebrate the end of WW1 as being when Versailles was signed, but that treaty is nothing to celebrate.
    Yes but is the point valid? Had Boris said in mid April VE Day was being cancelled and everything would happen on VJ Day, would anyone have objected? We could have moved the Bank Holiday to the 14th August which is during summer holidays anyway.

    Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.
    The problem you face is that people don’t really know about VJ (it’s forgotten, yes I know). VE ties into a national mythology which is at best objectively dubious but is real for many. It also, if one is being cynical, ties into Brexit and the standing alone but ultimately being victorious and special, which seems to have its own mystique got the government’s supporters.
    Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.
    The bombings of Hamburg in 1943 were quite unpleasant in consequence. As was Dresden (we have an airforce and were going to use it). There’s plenty that’s dubious in any war, why choose those?
    The Japanese surrendered as a direct consequence of those atomic bombings. Not so for the Germans.
    The atomic bombings AND the invasion of Manchuria and Korea by the Soviets.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    eadric said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    They wont put up with it for five more weeks, judging by my friend and relatives (who are a very mixed bunch, scattered around the UK - and indeed the world)
    So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....

    Until we get a vaccine we'll be tip toeing through this... for years if need be....

    The herd theory is just shit because to achieve that we have to kill off hundreds of thousands of our population....but worse...we will leave possibly millions of others needing intensive therapies like dialysis, physio, vascular and heart treatments, lung therapies....
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    O/T, but I wonder if anyone has any recommendations for beard oil? I've always been clean shaven, but the lockdown has led me to grow it out.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,878
    Floater said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    An interesting reflection of national myths, perhaps, rather than considered historical judgement. Whether it is even a meaningful question is also open to doubt. The war was won by the three main allied powers, and it is not certain it could have been won without any one of them.
    Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?

    Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
    The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.

    Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport
    And a fair few fighters and fighter-bombers.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Interesting paper on a possible feedback loop - suggested that the immune reaction to Covid infection seems to upregulate the expression of the cell receptor which the virus targets.

    Cross-talk between the airway epithelium and activated immune cells defines severity in COVID-19
    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.29.20084327v1
    ... The clinical course of COVID-19 is highly variable, however, underlying host factors and determinants of severe disease are still unknown. Based on single-cell transcriptomes of nasopharyngeal and bronchial samples from clinically well-characterized patients presenting with moderate and critical severities, we reveal the different types and states of airway epithelial cells that are vulnerable for SARS-CoV-2 infection. In COVID-19 patients, we observed a two- to threefold increase of cells expressing the SARS-CoV-2 entry receptor ACE2 within the airway epithelial cell compartment. ACE2 is upregulated in epithelial cells through Interferon signals by immune cells suggesting that the viral defense system may increase the number of potentially susceptible cells in the respiratory epithelium. Infected epithelial cells recruit and activate immune cells by chemokine signaling. Recruited T lymphocytes and inflammatory macrophages were hyperactivated and showed a strong interaction with epithelial cells. In critical patients, increased expression of CCL2, CCL3, CCL5, CXCL9, CXCL10, IL8, IL1B and TNF in macrophages was identified as a likely cause of a hyperinflammatory lung pathology. Moreover, we observed exacerbated epithelial cell death, likely leading to lung injury and respiratory failure in fatal cases. Our study provides novel insights into the pathophysiology of COVID-19 and suggests an immunomodulatory therapy along the CCL2, CCL3/CCR1 axis as promising option to prevent and treat critical course of COVID-19....
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    tyson said:

    eadric said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    They wont put up with it for five more weeks, judging by my friend and relatives (who are a very mixed bunch, scattered around the UK - and indeed the world)
    So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....

    Until we get a vaccine we'll be tip toeing through this... for years if need be....

    The herd theory is just shit because to achieve that we have to kill off hundreds of thousands of our population....but worse...we will leave possibly millions of others needing intensive therapies like dialysis, physio, vascular and heart treatments, lung therapies....
    Not necessarily, it depends on who gets it. If the vulnerable are sheltered more, it should have less of an effect. And millions requiring intensive therapies? Where's that estimate from?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    But the economy is fucked anyway. Your route isn't going to fill airlines restaurants, pubs hotels or city centres any time soon. Entertainment wiped out too.
    Offices are gonna stand empty. Property prices crash. Transport in the public sectors for the foreseeable future.
    The way they need to level is to admit this. We are going to have to put up with a global depression with certain sectors almost entirely wiped out.
    We can either bear this with a large number of deaths or a truly horrific number.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    dixiedean said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    But the economy is fucked anyway. Your route isn't going to fill airlines restaurants, pubs hotels or city centres any time soon. Entertainment wiped out too.
    Offices are gonna stand empty. Property prices crash. Transport in the public sectors for the foreseeable future.
    The way they need to level is to admit this. We are going to have to put up with a global depression with certain sectors almost entirely wiped out.
    We can either bear this with a large number of deaths or a truly horrific number.
    Yup. This is the conclusion I came to several weeks ago.

    It makes life much easier to bear if one accepts this fact, and proceeds from there.
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    BigRich said:

    ukpaul said:

    FF43 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pulpstar said:

    To emulate Sweden's strategy you need
    i) A low base level of infection
    ii) A sensible population, or one that normally has a higher than average level of social distancing
    iii) A population that's prepared to be even more cautious than normal for a very long time indeed.

    I'm not sure we're there on any of those counts in this country.

    Given most of them live in middle of nowhere with a few cities it is a lot easier than UK for sure. Build a wall around London and we are OK.
    You would have to do a lot more wall building than that:

    https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1258032323343376384
    That really does explain clearly just how badly we have done. We didn’t have a hotspot area and yet, still, w
    rcs1000 said:

    @BigRich

    How concerned are you about the reports of serious long-term side effects from CV-19, in particular renal and heart failure?

    "Many people think COVID-19 kills 1% of patients, and the rest get away with some flulike symptoms. But the story gets more complicated. Many people will be left with chronic kidney and heart problems. Even their neural system is disrupted. There will be hundreds of thousands of people worldwide, possibly more, who will need treatments such as renal dialysis for the rest of their lives."

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/finally-virus-got-me-scientist-who-fought-ebola-and-hiv-reflects-facing-death-covid-19

    This is so important, yet the freedom advocates conveniently gloss over it, If you have an underlying condition, as millions do, it is the potential for long term health issues that is the big fear rather than dying, given the much greater likelihood of the former.

    Now that more have decided that they own the streets, the more that others will be unlikely to step outside, given the all too likely consequences.
    Thank you for referring to me as a Freedom advocate, not as somebody who is not concerned. That is much appreciated.

    I realy do think that

    1) There is a very high chance that eventually most people will get this.

    2) Given point 1) it would be better if the health people got it than the old/ill

    3) Without the lock down, young/healthy people will take more risks, get it first,, letting it die out without as many old/ill people having to get it.

    4) The appoch will not have perfect results but will be better than lock down.

    And ones again, thanks for keeping this civil.
    The problem is that the groups who are affected are very particular and how do you make sure that one is safe and not the other.

    Men are twice as likely to die of it. Certain BAME groups the same. BMI Over 30 is a high risk and over 35 an even higher risk. 50+ year olds much greater risk than 30 year olds and younger. That's not even thinking about how hospitalisation and the risk of long term care plays out as a different factor.

    Is any government going to be able to tease out those differences? They can't draw a line because that line is so fuzzy as to be invisible. A 60 year old woman with a BMI under 30 has less risk than a a man in his fifties with a BMI over 30. Who gets to go out and who has to stay out of harm's way?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    Media...we need to lockdown the borders...government not doing enough...

    Ok we will finally say you must self isolate for 14 days when arriving in the country

    Media....Two-week quarantine for travellers ‘would devastate airline industry’, and why are we doing this for something that is so mild for most people. And of course Simon Caulder pops up to say, but there was going to be some great cheap holidays in Greece.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDXRzKOWho&t=380s
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    eadric said:

    tyson said:

    eadric said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    They wont put up with it for five more weeks, judging by my friend and relatives (who are a very mixed bunch, scattered around the UK - and indeed the world)
    So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....

    Until we get a vaccine we'll be tip toeing through this... for years if need be....

    The herd theory is just shit because to achieve that we have to kill off hundreds of thousands of our population....but worse...we will leave possibly millions of others needing intensive therapies like dialysis, physio, vascular and heart treatments, lung therapies....
    Not football or clubbing, no. But parks open, Transport back to normal, most shops open (with masks and distance) almost all people back to work, Yes. We have to or we will die of hunger and despair

    That’s the stark choice we face. It’s a plague and it’s hideous. But shutting down life permanently is not an option. People are gonna die and we have to endure it.
    I agree..that is what life will be...just living with this virus, most of us worried of social contact but muddling on as best can we can....

    There are worst things......I guess....


  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    Mortimer said:

    O/T, but I wonder if anyone has any recommendations for beard oil? I've always been clean shaven, but the lockdown has led me to grow it out.

    I must confess I've grown a beard for the first time since my student days - ah, yes, long hair and Rainbow (NOT Zippy and Bungle but Ritchie Blackmore and Graham Bonnet).

    Beards need a lot of looking after - I have an excellent trimmer and have decided I'm going for the George Clooney look rather than a cross between Santa Claus and Grizzly Adams.

    As for oil, Kiehl's is the one for me but there are some other good brands out there.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    Mortimer said:

    matt said:

    tyson said:

    matt said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Where are you quoting from, please.

    If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
    There are no good choices....
    There are choices for the long term and for the short term. I’m am unconvinced that hoping something turns up is a choice but if everyone else is doing it, as politician you lose nothing by going with the flow..
    Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.

    When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.
    Ironically. We have just celebrated VE anniversary. And are debating WW2 success. Batting for time is one thing we are actually good at.
    Except in cricket.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    eadric said:

    What is all the fuss about? The answers to C4Ciaran's question are: VE Day; the street parties pictured look socially distanced; HMG has been flying kites about easing restrictions this weekend and what is a day here or there?
    Exactly right. I am beginning to tire of Covid fascists.
    Also, it’s really hard to catch coronavirus outdoors

    https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/1258032800608944128?s=21
    I think it is likely to be much higher risk at indoor mass events.

    But in China you basically couldn't go out, other than when the big loud speaker told you that your apartment could now leave for your 10 mins walk and for food. And everybody who went out, was masked, goggles, and nobody would go near them....even shops, you had to get your order thrust at you via a stick.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    stodge said:

    Mortimer said:

    O/T, but I wonder if anyone has any recommendations for beard oil? I've always been clean shaven, but the lockdown has led me to grow it out.

    I must confess I've grown a beard for the first time since my student days - ah, yes, long hair and Rainbow (NOT Zippy and Bungle but Ritchie Blackmore and Graham Bonnet).

    Beards need a lot of looking after - I have an excellent trimmer and have decided I'm going for the George Clooney look rather than a cross between Santa Claus and Grizzly Adams.

    As for oil, Kiehl's is the one for me but there are some other good brands out there.
    Thanks @stodge - Cloony length is exactly what I have! Use Kiehl's moisturiser too, so I know it works well with my skin. Already had the trimmer for sideburns - which is rather handy.

    Getting off the shaving every 1.5 days bandwagon is saving me a fortune in razor blades!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Holy Moly

    80% turnout in Billericay in 1959. Swing to the Tories 3.7% I sense a Tory victory ;)

    Only 2 Tory leaders have won a bigger majority than Boris did last year since WW2, Thatcher in 1983 and 1987 and Macmillan in 1959.
    There do not seem to be Lib candidates in every seat..
    I think 1974 was the first year that the Liberal Party ran in nearly all seats. It increased their vote share quite a bit, but notreflected in numbers of seats.
    Even in February 1974 there were circa 100 seats without a Liberal candidate. In October the party ran a full slate for the first time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.

    There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    Media...we need to lockdown the borders...government not doing enough...

    Ok we will finally say you must self isolate for 14 days when arriving in the country

    Media....Two-week quarantine for travellers ‘would devastate airline industry’, and why are we doing this for something that is so mild for most people. And of course Simon Caulder pops up to say, but there was going to be some great cheap holidays in Greece.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDXRzKOWho&t=380s

    I thought the same.....

    It is stating the bleeding obvious to quarantine....and the UK has all the advantages of an Island as track and trace becomes more efficient which will give us a better control of it all....

    But..it comes at an economic cost obviously.....Blackpool will have a good summer in 2021
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    dixiedean said:


    But the economy is fucked anyway. Your route isn't going to fill airlines restaurants, pubs hotels or city centres any time soon. Entertainment wiped out too.
    Offices are gonna stand empty. Property prices crash. Transport in the public sectors for the foreseeable future.
    The way they need to level is to admit this. We are going to have to put up with a global depression with certain sectors almost entirely wiped out.
    We can either bear this with a large number of deaths or a truly horrific number.

    A global nuclear war would destroy the economy - a pandemic with an infection rate of 90% and a mortality rate of 75% destroys the economy.

    This won't.

    It will be bad for some if not many but we come back to human ingenuity and the brutality of capitalism. Those businesses which can adapt quickly can not only survive but prosper and some have.

    It's also true adversity breeds opportunity and new businesses will emerge from the ashes of the old - new ways to make money because that's what capitalism does. The weak or the unlucky or the outmoded or the obsolete perish but they are replaced by something new, dynamic, modern and relevant.

    As an example, there will be many more people working at home for a considerable time - that provides a new market and new opportunities.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    edited May 2020

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.

    I'm 33, I don't plan on returning to a 'normal' life until we're either really on top of this, have a vaccine, or an effective therapeutic treatment.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Holy Moly

    80% turnout in Billericay in 1959. Swing to the Tories 3.7% I sense a Tory victory ;)

    Butler was actually wrong on that and later corrected himself. Billericay did show a small swing to Labour.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.

    There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.

    Hopefully the 70 plus are still locked in though....

    It'll be bliss blasting through a golf course without getting stuck behind a quartet of greyheads.....
  • glwglw Posts: 9,908
    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,932
    tyson said:

    Media...we need to lockdown the borders...government not doing enough...

    Ok we will finally say you must self isolate for 14 days when arriving in the country

    Media....Two-week quarantine for travellers ‘would devastate airline industry’, and why are we doing this for something that is so mild for most people. And of course Simon Caulder pops up to say, but there was going to be some great cheap holidays in Greece.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sDXRzKOWho&t=380s

    I thought the same.....

    It is stating the bleeding obvious to quarantine....and the UK has all the advantages of an Island as track and trace becomes more efficient which will give us a better control of it all....

    But..it comes at an economic cost obviously.....Blackpool will have a good summer in 2021
    Ideally we'd replace quarantine with testing.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
    To get an idea of where some think we are at, Google and Facebook have told all their employees is it work from home for the rest of the year as the general rule, with exceptions made where required.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    edited May 2020
    eadric said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    They wont put up with it for five more weeks, judging by my friend and relatives (who are a very mixed bunch, scattered around the UK - and indeed the world)
    Agreed

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1258431809576153090?s=20.

    Ease off the lockdown over the summer and focus on developing herd immunity for the under 70s and just keep the over 70s and those with health conditions indoors until we get a vaccine
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
    To get an idea of where some think we are at, Google and Facebook have told all their employees is it work from home for the rest of the year as the general rule, with exceptions made where required.
    Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
    I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.

    For me, its

    £3.49 x 2 - Amazon films
    £33 - some beard oil, just now
    £73.55 - a week's shopping for two people

    We have no mortgage, no bills due this week.

    I'd say thats about 1/3rd to 1/4 of my usual discretionary weekly spend.

    I'm not going to be spending more next week if the Govt actually removed lockdown entirely. Because the fear.
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
    Vastly more. And demanding further transfers of wealth and opportunity from the young and youngish to them. I’m sure it will all work out. Or not,
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
    To get an idea of where some think we are at, Google and Facebook have told all their employees is it work from home for the rest of the year as the general rule, with exceptions made where required.
    Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.
    The rest of the year is exactly how long I plan to keep my shop closed, at present.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    edited May 2020
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.

    I'm 33, I don't plan on returning to a 'normal' life until we're either really on top of this, have a vaccine, or an effective therapeutic treatment.
    I think you Mortimer and 90 percent of the rest of us are in agreement....

    I think I'm as fit as I've been for years...I managed a 124 straight press-ups yesterday which is a world record for Tyson....(beating my 116)

    But, quite frankly, I'm not going back to normal until it is normal....(or until "it's Safe" to quote a film,,,any takers?)
  • glwglw Posts: 9,908

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
    To get an idea of where some think we are at, Google and Facebook have told all their employees is it work from home for the rest of the year as the general rule, with exceptions made where required.
    Yes I heard that as well. Of course it's relatively easy for those two businesses, but it does indicate that some of the smarter people out there aren't expecting it to all blow over anytime soon.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.
    That's the third study now that knocks that idea on the head. As a rule of thumb it looks like you can take known cases and multiply by 10, it would need to be nearer 100 to give us any confidence that we can ride this out. IRF does seem to be around 0.8%, so it's also quite a lot worse than most flu seasons, and closer to the truly catastrophic flu outbreaks of history.

    My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
    To get an idea of where some think we are at, Google and Facebook have told all their employees is it work from home for the rest of the year as the general rule, with exceptions made where required.
    Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.
    They are certainly far better positioned to work from home, but remember they were also very quick onto the scale of this, and it would still be preferable to have people coming in at least part-time.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    But the economy is fucked anyway. Your route isn't going to fill airlines restaurants, pubs hotels or city centres any time soon. Entertainment wiped out too.
    Offices are gonna stand empty. Property prices crash. Transport in the public sectors for the foreseeable future.
    The way they need to level is to admit this. We are going to have to put up with a global depression with certain sectors almost entirely wiped out.
    We can either bear this with a large number of deaths or a truly horrific number.

    A global nuclear war would destroy the economy - a pandemic with an infection rate of 90% and a mortality rate of 75% destroys the economy.

    This won't.

    It will be bad for some if not many but we come back to human ingenuity and the brutality of capitalism. Those businesses which can adapt quickly can not only survive but prosper and some have.

    It's also true adversity breeds opportunity and new businesses will emerge from the ashes of the old - new ways to make money because that's what capitalism does. The weak or the unlucky or the outmoded or the obsolete perish but they are replaced by something new, dynamic, modern and relevant.

    As an example, there will be many more people working at home for a considerable time - that provides a new market and new opportunities.
    I don't think any of that, with which I largely agree, precludes the fact that we are going to be facing a global depression. Of course we will adjust in time.
    But in the short and medium term, 2 to 3 years, the economy is fucked. Even saying let the young go out as normal and keep vulnerable groups at home takes an almighty wodge of the spending power out of the economy.
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    edited May 2020
    Duplicate Post
  • ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    edited May 2020
    HYUFD said:

    eadric said:

    RobD said:

    tyson said:

    Serology data gathered in the last two weeks has also concerned government experts. While chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said back in March that he expected around 60% of the population to eventually contract the virus, achieving “herd immunity”, it is currently believed that the percentage of those who have had it is in the low teens or high single figures. This also raises the possibility of an extremely deadly second wave.

    Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....

    When do you think will be the next time when we will see the Kop full of scallies?

    This time last year I was clubbing it watching Paul Oakenfeld.....a bit worse for wear.........

    This perhaps could be with us now for the next 4 or 5 years.....
    I doubt it. Either there will be a vaccine, or herd immunity will be reached. People won't put up with this for five years.
    They wont put up with it for five more weeks, judging by my friend and relatives (who are a very mixed bunch, scattered around the UK - and indeed the world)
    Agreed

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1258431809576153090?s=20.

    Ease off the lockdown over the summer and focus on developing herd immunity for the under 70s and just keep the over 70s and those with health conditions indoors until we get a vaccine
    As I said above that leads to massive inequalities if that's your only criteria. If you are a man under seventy, suddenly you are twice as likely to die than if you are a woman, if you are from a BAME background similarly. We are way past such blunt instrument groupings, even considering co-morbidities. This virus divides in much more difficult ways that can be managed easily by in or out.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Enforcement now seems to be a dead duck. A minor heatwave would pretty much shag the lockdown wouldn't it?

    https://twitter.com/KelvinJRobbins/status/1259208314744864770?s=20
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    Interesting programme on Peter Sellers on BBC2
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729

    Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.

    There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.

    How do you know its a leak? Do you have proof that it is fact?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Mortimer said:


    £33 - some beard oil, just now

    Get you!
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117
    dixiedean said:

    stodge said:

    dixiedean said:


    But the economy is fucked anyway. Your route isn't going to fill airlines restaurants, pubs hotels or city centres any time soon. Entertainment wiped out too.
    Offices are gonna stand empty. Property prices crash. Transport in the public sectors for the foreseeable future.
    The way they need to level is to admit this. We are going to have to put up with a global depression with certain sectors almost entirely wiped out.
    We can either bear this with a large number of deaths or a truly horrific number.

    A global nuclear war would destroy the economy - a pandemic with an infection rate of 90% and a mortality rate of 75% destroys the economy.

    This won't.

    It will be bad for some if not many but we come back to human ingenuity and the brutality of capitalism. Those businesses which can adapt quickly can not only survive but prosper and some have.

    It's also true adversity breeds opportunity and new businesses will emerge from the ashes of the old - new ways to make money because that's what capitalism does. The weak or the unlucky or the outmoded or the obsolete perish but they are replaced by something new, dynamic, modern and relevant.

    As an example, there will be many more people working at home for a considerable time - that provides a new market and new opportunities.
    I don't think any of that, with which I largely agree, precludes the fact that we are going to be facing a global depression. Of course we will adjust in time.
    But in the short and medium term, 2 to 3 years, the economy is fucked. Even saying let the young go out as normal and keep vulnerable groups at home takes an almighty wodge of the spending power out of the economy.
    The only reason why the stock market is resilient (sort of) is because it is full of hedgers who plough in and out.....

    The real world economy is in a shocking state for the next few years possibly....
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127

    Mortimer said:


    £33 - some beard oil, just now

    Get you!
    To be honest, its probably about what I've saved in razor blades over the past two months!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    edited May 2020
    ukpaul said:

    Duplicate Post

    If you are a man under 70 you are still less likely to die of it than a woman over 80. The only reason BAME people are more affected is they tend to live in big cities, BAME people in rural areas are less affected than white people in big cities.

    So my point stands, a line has to be drawn somewhere and 70 is it.

    Over 70s are retired and do not need to work, they can live off their pension and just go out when absolutely necessary
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837

    Enforcement now seems to be a dead duck. A minor heatwave would pretty much shag the lockdown wouldn't it?

    https://twitter.com/KelvinJRobbins/status/1259208314744864770?s=20

    Someone has a house party of 50 people - arrest and charge the organisers.

    People sunbathing in their own groups in a park - if the park gets too busy dont let more people in or move people on.

    Is it really complicated?

    Laws + common sense = Good policing
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    Very amusing Mask article on daily mash!
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,117

    Mortimer said:


    £33 - some beard oil, just now

    Get you!
    I noticed that...33 notes for beard oil....just fucking shave comrade you millennial, quinoa eating, hipster, lettuce munching, metrosexual, namby pamby.....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    It amazing how fast fake news spreads on twitter...I keep seeing a particular image on the right pop up on my timeline about #COVIDIOTS...

    https://twitter.com/JonathanFarrarL/status/1259207347009880069?s=20

    Now, I know China covered up it, but not sure all the way back to August 2019...

    https://www.cityam.com/focus-on-london-fields-the-attractive-hackney-suburb-buyers-dont-want-to-leave/
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,993
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
    I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.

    For me, its

    £3.49 x 2 - Amazon films
    £33 - some beard oil, just now
    £73.55 - a week's shopping for two people

    We have no mortgage, no bills due this week.

    I'd say thats about 1/3rd to 1/4 of my usual discretionary weekly spend.

    I'm not going to be spending more next week if the Govt actually removed lockdown entirely. Because the fear.
    I’ve just spent £450 on a football season ticket for next campaign, despite my team being relegated due to the remaining fixtures being curtailed - beat that for that for irrational optimism!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    HYUFD said:



    If you are a man under 70 you are still less likely to die of it than a woman over 80. The only reason BAME people are more affected is they tend to live in big cities, BAME people in rural areas are less affected than white people in big cities.

    So my point stands, a line has to be drawn somewhere and 70 is it.

    Over 70s are retired and do not need to work, they can live off their pension and just go out when absolutely necessary

    No, the "line" as you put it has to include younger people with existing health conditions such as for example hypertension. @Foxy tells us it's a vascular illness and recovery from it can for some be slow and permanent damage may be done.

    Everyone has to take a view based on their own health and medical condition - in any case public transport capacity is going to be well below the level required for any mass return to work in the near future.

    It may be fine for those who live at the end of the line but the tubes are going to get very full very quickly if the service is at current levels.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    I am not sure how the public are going to react when it starts to dawn that this social distancing thing isn't just for Christmas, it forever, until we get a vaccine.

    I think a lot of people think few more weeks and it will be basically back to normal in time for my holibobs to Ayia Napa or Ibiza.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    sarissa said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
    I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.

    For me, its

    £3.49 x 2 - Amazon films
    £33 - some beard oil, just now
    £73.55 - a week's shopping for two people

    We have no mortgage, no bills due this week.

    I'd say thats about 1/3rd to 1/4 of my usual discretionary weekly spend.

    I'm not going to be spending more next week if the Govt actually removed lockdown entirely. Because the fear.
    I’ve just spent £450 on a football season ticket for next campaign, despite my team being relegated due to the remaining fixtures being curtailed - beat that for that for irrational optimism!
    Ha! Top effort.

    As a West Brom fan with lots of Liverpool supporting mates, I'm looking for a way for us Baggies to be promoted but Liverpool denied the title on a technicality...
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    edited May 2020
    Mortimer said:

    Very amusing Mask article on daily mash!

    deleted

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    tyson said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.

    I'm 33, I don't plan on returning to a 'normal' life until we're either really on top of this, have a vaccine, or an effective therapeutic treatment.
    I think you Mortimer and 90 percent of the rest of us are in agreement....

    I think I'm as fit as I've been for years...I managed a 124 straight press-ups yesterday which is a world record for Tyson....(beating my 116)

    But, quite frankly, I'm not going back to normal until it is normal....(or until "it's Safe" to quote a film,,,any takers?)
    I don't think we're ever going back to normal. Not as it was before this all started. But that's pedantry, I get your general point.

    Everyone will be approaching this on a sliding scale of risk. Some very old, very ill or very anxious people will hide in their houses and never go out unless it's a matter of dire necessity. Quite a lot of younger people will judge the risk to be low, conclude that life's for living and just go out there and get on with it. The rest of us will be somewhere in between.

    Personally, I can see myself sticking to something close to the current restrictions until either (a) this is over - through herd immunity or a vaccine - or (b) it becomes obvious that it's never going to be over and there's no further point in hiding from it.

    That said, if things get substantially better whilst we're waiting for (a) then there will be visits to parents and close friends, and perhaps the odd trip to a restaurant - certainly no fancy holidays or shopping jollies to London.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999

    Enforcement now seems to be a dead duck. A minor heatwave would pretty much shag the lockdown wouldn't it?

    https://twitter.com/KelvinJRobbins/status/1259208314744864770?s=20

    Someone has a house party of 50 people - arrest and charge the organisers.

    People sunbathing in their own groups in a park - if the park gets too busy dont let more people in or move people on.

    Is it really complicated?

    Laws + common sense = Good policing
    As long as it stays nice and middle class. I don't know what it's like round your bit but impromptu parties in parks mixed with drink and sunshine have a tendency to kick off where I am.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    sarissa said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    eadric said:

    dixiedean said:

    Mortimer said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The hawks can't be seriously thinking that either

    a) a second peak, and associated lockdown

    or

    b) a rise in cases, leading to further fear amongst population

    are a better economic position than

    c) waiting a bit longer.

    Can they?
    They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.
    Because, well, because it will.

    This does not include the group who think lockdown is having more serious social and health side effects than the disease itself btw.
    Yes it does. I’m one. I know how bad this but is I am now of the opinion we should go for herd immunity.

    There will be a big death toll. It won’t be enormous because we will have spare capacity to avoid Wuhan/Milan. But it will be big.

    Let those who want to go out and work, or play, or drink, do that. Let every adult decide for themselves. Assess the risk. It’s your call.

    The government needs to level with us. This isn’t going away and it’s grim. But a Totally fucked economy is grimmer
    You think the economy survives a massive death toll?

    I've got a bridge to sell you....
    Given that 95% of those who die of this thing are over 60, any Government concerned solely with the good of the economy would allow the illness to run its course. It would materially reduce the median age of the population, altering the ratio of working to retired persons in favour of the former, significantly cut the cost to the taxpayer of providing pensions and social care, and release a pulse of consumption into the economy as heirs spend some of their inheritances.

    Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
    Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...
    And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.

    If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
    I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.

    For me, its

    £3.49 x 2 - Amazon films
    £33 - some beard oil, just now
    £73.55 - a week's shopping for two people

    We have no mortgage, no bills due this week.

    I'd say thats about 1/3rd to 1/4 of my usual discretionary weekly spend.

    I'm not going to be spending more next week if the Govt actually removed lockdown entirely. Because the fear.
    I’ve just spent £450 on a football season ticket for next campaign, despite my team being relegated due to the remaining fixtures being curtailed - beat that for that for irrational optimism!
    Jambo?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    tyson said:

    Mortimer said:


    £33 - some beard oil, just now

    Get you!
    I noticed that...33 notes for beard oil....just fucking shave comrade you millennial, quinoa eating, hipster, lettuce munching, metrosexual, namby pamby.....
    Feck me - I have a fairly good standard of living and I would never spend that on beard oil ....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    HYUFD said:

    twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1259223834873520130?s=20

    Different lockdowns in different parts of the country....like when Atlanta opened up and people flocked there from neighbouring states.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:



    If you are a man under 70 you are still less likely to die of it than a woman over 80. The only reason BAME people are more affected is they tend to live in big cities, BAME people in rural areas are less affected than white people in big cities.

    So my point stands, a line has to be drawn somewhere and 70 is it.

    Over 70s are retired and do not need to work, they can live off their pension and just go out when absolutely necessary

    No, the "line" as you put it has to include younger people with existing health conditions such as for example hypertension. @Foxy tells us it's a vascular illness and recovery from it can for some be slow and permanent damage may be done.

    Everyone has to take a view based on their own health and medical condition - in any case public transport capacity is going to be well below the level required for any mass return to work in the near future.

    It may be fine for those who live at the end of the line but the tubes are going to get very full very quickly if the service is at current levels.
    I would though make wearing masks on the tube and public transport compulsory.

    I said those with pre existing health conditions would join over 70s in being advised to stay in
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    HYUFD said:
    New Zealand had a staged release from lockdown. They went from 4 to 3 two weeks ago and could well move to 2 by the end of next week.

    https://covid19.govt.nz/alert-system/alert-level-2/#we-are-still-at-alert-level-3

    I suspect NZ level 2 is where Johnson would like us to be by the beginning of June but NZ's record on cases is so much better than ours currently.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    Boris might as well not give a speech tomorrow night, I think we have already heard all the new announcements.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,898
    HYUFD said:


    I would though make wearing masks on the tube and public transport compulsory.

    I said those with pre existing health conditions would join over 70s in being advised to stay in

    Fair enough - I'm in the latter category and intend to keep very much at home for the foreseeable.
This discussion has been closed.