politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden’s VP pick: The case for Kamala Harris
Options
Comments
-
The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.rcs1000 said:
Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport0 -
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?IshmaelZ said:
Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.matt said:
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.stodge said:
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.gettingbetter said:
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.stodge said:
Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.BannedinnParis said:so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.
Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.0 -
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).....DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
0 -
I don't have a car either. Aside from the breakdown accident already covered, one problem is where are they driving to?Anabobazina said:
I’m asking a question. What are the risks associated with people going for local drives?SandyRentool said:
Higher than if they don't make the unnecessary journey.Anabobazina said:
What are the chances of someone’s car breaking down on a local drive?SandyRentool said:
I'll repeat that right now. I couldn't give a feck if dickheads want to increase their risk of infection.Anabobazina said: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”.
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.
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 don’t have a car so I don’t know.
If it is local it will be to one of a handful of local amenities or beauty spots.
Thus creating a crowd.0 -
The Japanese surrendered as a direct consequence of those atomic bombings. Not so for the Germans.matt said:
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?IshmaelZ said:
Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.matt said:
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.stodge said:
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.gettingbetter said:
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.stodge said:
Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.BannedinnParis said:so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.
Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.0 -
Apologies for cutting part of your erudite response, my friend.peter_from_putney said: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.
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.
0 -
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.IshmaelZ said:
Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.matt said:
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.stodge said:
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.gettingbetter said:
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.stodge said:
Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.BannedinnParis said:so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.
Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.0 -
Thats the disease that Foxy posted about previously - there are instances in several US states and on the European mainland nowTheScreamingEagles said:0 -
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.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
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.0 -
RTAs, largely, which divert resources.Anabobazina said:
I’m asking a question. What are the risks associated with people going for local drives?SandyRentool said:
Higher than if they don't make the unnecessary journey.Anabobazina said:
What are the chances of someone’s car breaking down on a local drive?SandyRentool said:
I'll repeat that right now. I couldn't give a feck if dickheads want to increase their risk of infection.Anabobazina said: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”.
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.
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 don’t have a car so I don’t know.0 -
-
Even in Western Europe the Nazis only really controlled the cities at its height....rcs1000 said:
Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
It would have been like the Soviets in Afghanistan....progressively getting degraded...
0 -
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?0 -
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.matt said:
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?IshmaelZ said:
Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.matt said:
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.stodge said:
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.gettingbetter said:
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.stodge said:
Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.BannedinnParis said:so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.
Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.0 -
And, unintentionally, most of their nuclear secrets.Floater said:
The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.rcs1000 said:
Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport0 -
Another good geographical comparison - Maine vs New Brunswick:
https://www.centralmaine.com/2020/05/09/how-new-brunswick-stopped-covid-19/#0 -
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.0
-
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....Foxy said:
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.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
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.
And that is why too many people who survive it will need long term therapies....
0 -
We supplied a lot of crucial equipment TO russian in 41. Something like 1 in 10 tanks defending Moscow were British.Floater said:
The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.rcs1000 said:
Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport
Whilst the absolute numbers of the material we sent is small the exact time we went it was utterly crucial.2 -
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.0 -
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
0 -
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.0 -
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
0 -
My apologies.matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/boris-johnson-sided-doves-over-hawks-lockdown0 -
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....0 -
There are no good choices....matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
0 -
Not for pensioners or people paid by the state, they’ll be fine.eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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 grimmer0 -
That's a fascinating read and if accurate suggests quite a split at the heart of the Conservative Party.Scott_xP said:
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.0 -
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....RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
0 -
We'll see. I think you are way too pessimistic.tyson said:
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....RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....0 -
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..tyson said:
There are no good choices....matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.0 -
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....0 -
Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.matt said:
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..tyson said:
There are no good choices....matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.0 -
Have there been any updates from the Oxford boffins?Mortimer said:
Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.matt said:
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..tyson said:
There are no good choices....matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.0 -
The atomic bombings AND the invasion of Manchuria and Korea by the Soviets.RobD said:
The Japanese surrendered as a direct consequence of those atomic bombings. Not so for the Germans.matt said:
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?IshmaelZ said:
Celebrating VJ = celebrating Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I imagine many people feel dubious about.matt said:
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.stodge said:
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.gettingbetter said:
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.stodge said:
Perhaps we should have cancelled all the VE day celebrations including the Bank Holiday and held them on VJ Day in September.BannedinnParis said:so, turns out there was mass disobedience of the lockdown this weekend. at least that wasn't entirely predictable.
Given it's not going to be easy to travel abroad this year the VJ Day celebrations would be a big part of Staycation 2020.0 -
So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....eadric said:
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)RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
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....
0 -
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.0
-
And a fair few fighters and fighter-bombers.Floater said:
The Americans supplied equipment - they armed us, themselves and supplied plenty of goods to the Russians.rcs1000 said:
Isn't the saying that we supplied time, the Americans supplied money, and the Russians supplied men?DecrepiterJohnL 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.HYUFD said:
Without any one of those three, the war would have been lost.
Including food and raw materials and of course motorised transport, loads of motorised transport0 -
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....0 -
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?tyson said:
So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....eadric said:
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)RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
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....0 -
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.eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
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.0 -
Yup. This is the conclusion I came to several weeks ago.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.eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
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.
It makes life much easier to bear if one accepts this fact, and proceeds from there.0 -
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.BigRich said:
Thank you for referring to me as a Freedom advocate, not as somebody who is not concerned. That is much appreciated.ukpaul said:
That really does explain clearly just how badly we have done. We didn’t have a hotspot area and yet, still, wFF43 said:
You would have to do a lot more wall building than that:malcolmg said:
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.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.
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1258032323343376384
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.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
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.
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.
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?0 -
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=380s1 -
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....eadric said:
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 despairtyson said:
So...in 5 weeks we'll have mass events??? Like football or clubbing.....eadric said:
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)RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
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....
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.
There are worst things......I guess....
0 -
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).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.
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.0 -
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.1 -
Ironically. We have just celebrated VE anniversary. And are debating WW2 success. Batting for time is one thing we are actually good at.Mortimer said:
Playing for time is always an option in policy. And in this case a very positive one.matt said:
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..tyson said:
There are no good choices....matt said:
Where are you quoting from, please.TheScreamingEagles 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.
If you lock everyone indoors wtf do you think will happen to the contraction rate. Choices have consequences.
When it looks like we may have a vaccine in the pipeline, time is very valuable indeed.
Except in cricket.0 -
I think it is likely to be much higher risk at indoor mass events.eadric said:
Also, it’s really hard to catch coronavirus outdoorsAnabobazina said:
Exactly right. I am beginning to tire of Covid fascists.DecrepiterJohnL 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?Theuniondivvie said:
Could have been anywhere.Andy_JS said:
Where the hell was that filmed?TheScreamingEagles said:
https://twitter.com/C4Ciaran/status/1258907561031618561?s=20
https://twitter.com/jen_keesmaat/status/1258032800608944128?s=21
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.0 -
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.stodge said:
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).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.
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.
Getting off the shaving every 1.5 days bandwagon is saving me a fortune in razor blades!0 -
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.Foxy said:
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.squareroot2 said:
There do not seem to be Lib candidates in every seat..HYUFD said:
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.squareroot2 said:Holy Moly
80% turnout in Billericay in 1959. Swing to the Tories 3.7% I sense a Tory victory
0 -
Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.
There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.0 -
I thought the same.....FrancisUrquhart 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
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
0 -
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.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.
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.
1 -
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
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.1 -
Butler was actually wrong on that and later corrected himself. Billericay did show a small swing to Labour.squareroot2 said:Holy Moly
80% turnout in Billericay in 1959. Swing to the Tories 3.7% I sense a Tory victory0 -
Hopefully the 70 plus are still locked in though....FrancisUrquhart said:Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.
There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.
It'll be bliss blasting through a golf course without getting stuck behind a quartet of greyheads.....
0 -
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.
0 -
Ideally we'd replace quarantine with testing.tyson said:
I thought the same.....FrancisUrquhart 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
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 20211 -
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.0 -
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.glw said:
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.0 -
Agreedeadric said:
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)RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
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 vaccine0 -
Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.glw said:
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.0 -
I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.Black_Rook said:
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
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.0 -
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,Black_Rook said:
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.0 -
The rest of the year is exactly how long I plan to keep my shop closed, at present.RobD said:
Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.glw said:
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.0 -
I think you Mortimer and 90 percent of the rest of us are in agreement....Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
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 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?)
0 -
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.glw said:
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.0 -
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.RobD said:
Nothing about their jobs means they need to be in the office. They'll be the last to return.FrancisUrquhart said:
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.glw said:
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.RobD said:
No big iceberg then. So much for it being around since October or whatever.TheScreamingEagles 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.
My hunch is that things will go from bad to worse, probably much worse, before any treatment or vaccine is ready.0 -
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.stodge said:
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.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.
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.
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.1 -
Duplicate Post0
-
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.HYUFD said:
Agreedeadric said:
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)RobD said:
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.tyson said:
Just think the vaccine doesn't arrive anytime soon....which is likely....TheScreamingEagles 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.
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.....
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
0 -
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=200 -
Interesting programme on Peter Sellers on BBC20
-
How do you know its a leak? Do you have proof that it is fact?FrancisUrquhart said:Mirror says golfing and fishing will be allowed.
There are more leaks about this Big Boris announcement than your average budget.0 -
Get you!Mortimer said:
£33 - some beard oil, just now0 -
The only reason why the stock market is resilient (sort of) is because it is full of hedgers who plough in and out.....dixiedean said:
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.stodge said:
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.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.
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.
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 real world economy is in a shocking state for the next few years possibly....0 -
To be honest, its probably about what I've saved in razor blades over the past two months!Theuniondivvie said:
Get you!Mortimer said:
£33 - some beard oil, just now0 -
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.ukpaul said:Duplicate Post
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 necessary0 -
Someone has a house party of 50 people - arrest and charge the organisers.Theuniondivvie said: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
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 policing0 -
Very amusing Mask article on daily mash!0
-
I noticed that...33 notes for beard oil....just fucking shave comrade you millennial, quinoa eating, hipster, lettuce munching, metrosexual, namby pamby.....Theuniondivvie said:
Get you!Mortimer said:
£33 - some beard oil, just now0 -
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/0 -
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!Mortimer said:
I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.Black_Rook said:
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
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.0 -
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.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
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.0 -
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.0 -
Ha! Top effort.sarissa said:
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!Mortimer said:
I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.Black_Rook said:
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
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.
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...0 -
0
-
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.tyson said:
I think you Mortimer and 90 percent of the rest of us are in agreement....Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know... Before we even get started on the fear factor.Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
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 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?)
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.0 -
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.noneoftheabove said:
Someone has a house party of 50 people - arrest and charge the organisers.Theuniondivvie said: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
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 policing0 -
-
Jambo?sarissa said:
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!Mortimer said:
I'd be interested to hear what others have spent this week.Black_Rook said:
And yet, overall they cost more to look after than they contribute. This is logical.Mortimer said:
Over 60s are huge economic actors, you know...Black_Rook said:
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.Mortimer said:
You think the economy survives a massive death toll?eadric said:
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.dixiedean said:
They are. But more likely it is a refined version of Brexit cakeism. Basically it will be all right.Mortimer said:
The hawks can't be seriously thinking that eitherScott_xP said:
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?
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.
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
I've got a bridge to sell you....
Lockdown is fundamentally all about altruism and human decency. Its economic consequences are, of course, entirely negative.
If your average retired person made a net positive contribution to the economy then there would be no need for anybody to work.
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.0 -
0
-
Feck me - I have a fairly good standard of living and I would never spend that on beard oil ....tyson said:
I noticed that...33 notes for beard oil....just fucking shave comrade you millennial, quinoa eating, hipster, lettuce munching, metrosexual, namby pamby.....Theuniondivvie said:
Get you!Mortimer said:
£33 - some beard oil, just now0 -
Different lockdowns in different parts of the country....like when Atlanta opened up and people flocked there from neighbouring states.HYUFD said:twitter.com/chrisshipitv/status/1259223834873520130?s=20
0 -
I would though make wearing masks on the tube and public transport compulsory.stodge said:
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.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
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 said those with pre existing health conditions would join over 70s in being advised to stay in0 -
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.HYUFD said:
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.2 -
Boris might as well not give a speech tomorrow night, I think we have already heard all the new announcements.0
-
Fair enough - I'm in the latter category and intend to keep very much at home for the foreseeable.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 in1
This discussion has been closed.