politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The prospect of a vaccine by Christmas dominates the front pag

Tim_B said:

First?

Of course you are first! How many people are up at this time of night?

Tim_B said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Tim_B said:

First?

Of course you are first! How many people are up at this time of night?

It's 11pm where I am

It ain't 11pm here ...

I am in the UK and wrote this an hour ago. I have insomnia

MikeSmithson said:

I am in the UK and wrote this an hour ago. I have insomnia

Sorry to hear that. Is it a Libdem thing?

Tim_B said:

MikeSmithson said:

I am in the UK and wrote this an hour ago. I have insomnia

Sorry to hear that. Is it a Libdem thing?

I don't think it is linked to politics but to age and the need to get up several times a night to have a wee

Botox to the bladder. That's the way to deal with middle of the night wee issues.

Plus, you end with a beautiful smooth looking bladder.

USA Democrat Veep nominee betting (Ladbrokes prices; boosts may be available).

Kamala Harris Evens
Susan Rice 3/1
Tammy Duckworth 6/1
Elizabeth Warren 12/1
Val Demings 12/1
Karen Bass 20/1
Michelle Obama 20/1
Keisha Lance Bottoms 33/1
Michelle Lujan Grisham 33/1
Stacey Abrams 50/1

That is all of those Shadsy lists at less than 100/1 and is posted because I too have a botox-free bladder and as a reminder of the perceived ranking of the likely candidates.

rcs1000 said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

USA Democrat Veep nominee betting (Ladbrokes prices; boosts may be available).

Kamala Harris Evens
Susan Rice 3/1
Tammy Duckworth 6/1
Elizabeth Warren 12/1
Val Demings 12/1
Karen Bass 20/1
Michelle Obama 20/1
Keisha Lance Bottoms 33/1
Michelle Lujan Grisham 33/1
Stacey Abrams 50/1

That is all of those Shadsy lists at less than 100/1 and is posted because I too have a botox-free bladder and as a reminder of the perceived ranking of the likely candidates.

Because I'm incredibly generous, I'll offer 25/1 on Michelle Obama, or any other member of the Obama family.

Are you using Barack's definition of his family?

https://twitter.com/obamawhitehouse/status/540264863658823682

On insomnia: there is a lot of it about! In my case it being the cat wanting to go out!

In other news:

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1285431831798730753?s=19

MikeSmithson said:

I am in the UK and wrote this an hour ago. I have insomnia

My usual rising time is 0445, like clockwork. And then a big breakfast. Soon it'll be dark when I arise. Damn.

Fingers crossed that’s good news on a vaccine. The world is a very weird place when there’s a nasty virus going round.

IshmaelZ said:

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

I have to agree. Without the hype, the news is that it has passed phase 1 trials which means only that it doesn't immediately kill people stone dead. The overtones of "all over by Christmas" seem to be lost on the headline writers.

"Die-effects" = side-effects presumably, though it comes to the same thing.

LOL. Lack of re-reading before actually posting. I probably left out the 'd' in 'side' and the 'helpful' little imp in the programme jumped to the wrong conclusion!

There seems to be something seriously wrong with Vanilla this morning. It’s hard work loading nested comments via the main site and it’s damn near impossible via Vanilla’s front page.

It’s been getting more unreliable for a while, but this is even worse than normal.

Foxy said:

On insomnia: there is a lot of it about! In my case it being the cat wanting to go out!

In other news:

https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1285431831798730753?s=19

One day someone will come up with a technological solution to that one.

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

Even if the vaccine isn't for you, the spread of the virus can be meaningfully slowed by making sure that (young) front line workers get it.

Scott_xP said:

Toms said:

Just a wee idea. For "Dragons' Den"?

Vanity face masks. Like individually designed tee shirts.
Someone's probably already thought of it.

You can get masks that are prints of your own face.

They are creepy AF

I wonder, is there a 'MAGA' one in the US!

SouthamObserver said:

Huge EU news overnight. A triumph for Merkel and, especially, Macron. From a Brexit perspective, the EU27 have once again shown they can work effectively together and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. But it will also mean they will be under less pressure to reach a deal that does not fit their overall objectives. Once again, those in the UK predicting the EU’s fragmentation and failure have been proved wrong. I guess we’ll never understand what drives it and just how strong the will is for it to succeed.

That's certainly true of EU politicians but less so of its subjects. What drives it is the 1000s of bureaucrats earning big money from it

Deleted. Vanilla quirk!

coach said:

SouthamObserver said:

Huge EU news overnight. A triumph for Merkel and, especially, Macron. From a Brexit perspective, the EU27 have once again shown they can work effectively together and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. But it will also mean they will be under less pressure to reach a deal that does not fit their overall objectives. Once again, those in the UK predicting the EU’s fragmentation and failure have been proved wrong. I guess we’ll never understand what drives it and just how strong the will is for it to succeed.

That's certainly true of EU politicians but less so of its subjects. What drives it is the 1000s of bureaucrats earning big money from it

Where do these 1000’s of EU bureaucrats work? The deal is good for all of the EU 27 it’s not charity it’s mutual self interest. Classic anti EU sentiment only ever looking at the inputs and only ever in cold cash terms.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Most people are still oblivious or in denial. At the moment Sunak is popular, give it until Christmas

rcs1000 said:

Botox to the bladder. That's the way to deal with middle of the night wee issues.

Plus, you end with a beautiful smooth looking bladder.

How many others posting here know what the inside of their bladders look like?

tlg86 said:

SouthamObserver said:

Huge EU news overnight. A triumph for Merkel and, especially, Macron. From a Brexit perspective, the EU27 have once again shown they can work effectively together and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. But it will also mean they will be under less pressure to reach a deal that does not fit their overall objectives. Once again, those in the UK predicting the EU’s fragmentation and failure have been proved wrong. I guess we’ll never understand what drives it and just how strong the will is for it to succeed.

At what price?

The final outcome is a messy bundle of compromises. As part of the deal, the “frugals” will receive significant increases in the rebates they receive on their budget contributions, a throwback from 1984 when Margaret Thatcher secured discounts on the UK’s out-sized budget contributions.

And...

On the rule of law, France, Germany and other countries had wanted a link to EU funds but Hungary and Poland’s governments, who have been previously accused of undermining judicial independence and minority rights, rejected this plan.

The compromise agreed by the leaders instead puts off designing a rule of law mechanism for another day with agreement to be made by a qualified majority of member states.

The final deal on Monday also swung in Poland’s favour by watering down a demand to link green transition funds to signing up to the 2050 climate target to the consternation of activist groups and senior MEPs.

Poland, which stands to gain €37bn in grants from the fund, plus potentially billions more from a “just transition fund” to move away from coal, is the only EU member state not to have made the 2050 pledge.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/20/macron-seeks-end-acrimony-eu-summit-enters-fourth-day

It's a compromise, as EU decisions always are. But the phrase "agreement to be made by a qualified majority of member states" is a ticking bomb as far as Hungary and Poland are concerned - the veto power that they had to protect each other in breaches of democracy has gone. Overall, Southam is right that it's a good result for the EU.

In the end, I suspect that Congress will come through with their similar current negotiations. The situation is too serious to allow them to fail.

coach said:

SouthamObserver said:

Huge EU news overnight. A triumph for Merkel and, especially, Macron. From a Brexit perspective, the EU27 have once again shown they can work effectively together and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. But it will also mean they will be under less pressure to reach a deal that does not fit their overall objectives. Once again, those in the UK predicting the EU’s fragmentation and failure have been proved wrong. I guess we’ll never understand what drives it and just how strong the will is for it to succeed.

That's certainly true of EU politicians but less so of its subjects. What drives it is the 1000s of bureaucrats earning big money from it

Coronavirus has made the EU more popular across the continent. It has given new impetus to the desire for social solidarity.

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

The positive rumblings about a vaccine just make me depressed as it means even best case scenario 2020 is a complete wash, and more likely plenty of 2021 as well.

Fysics_Teacher said:

Having just read through last night’s thread can I add “free movement” to the “accurate but misleading” column?

Yes. FoM means something very specific in the context of the EU, namely the right to live and work - in the U.K. this means the right to an NI number, state benefits and NHS treatment - nothing at all to do with rights of entry at border crossings.

NickPalmer said:

tlg86 said:

SouthamObserver said:

Huge EU news overnight. A triumph for Merkel and, especially, Macron. From a Brexit perspective, the EU27 have once again shown they can work effectively together and compromise to reach a mutually beneficial outcome. But it will also mean they will be under less pressure to reach a deal that does not fit their overall objectives. Once again, those in the UK predicting the EU’s fragmentation and failure have been proved wrong. I guess we’ll never understand what drives it and just how strong the will is for it to succeed.

At what price?

The final outcome is a messy bundle of compromises. As part of the deal, the “frugals” will receive significant increases in the rebates they receive on their budget contributions, a throwback from 1984 when Margaret Thatcher secured discounts on the UK’s out-sized budget contributions.

And...

On the rule of law, France, Germany and other countries had wanted a link to EU funds but Hungary and Poland’s governments, who have been previously accused of undermining judicial independence and minority rights, rejected this plan.

The compromise agreed by the leaders instead puts off designing a rule of law mechanism for another day with agreement to be made by a qualified majority of member states.

The final deal on Monday also swung in Poland’s favour by watering down a demand to link green transition funds to signing up to the 2050 climate target to the consternation of activist groups and senior MEPs.

Poland, which stands to gain €37bn in grants from the fund, plus potentially billions more from a “just transition fund” to move away from coal, is the only EU member state not to have made the 2050 pledge.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/20/macron-seeks-end-acrimony-eu-summit-enters-fourth-day

It's a compromise, as EU decisions always are. But the phrase "agreement to be made by a qualified majority of member states" is a ticking bomb as far as Hungary and Poland are concerned - the veto power that they had to protect each other in breaches of democracy has gone. Overall, Southam is right that it's a good result for the EU.

In the end, I suspect that Congress will come through with their similar current negotiations. The situation is too serious to allow them to fail.

I'll believe it when I see it. For the time being the EU fanatics on here should keep quiet about rigged elections in Poland. The EU very much tolerates it.

https://twitter.com/thetimesscot/status/1285467934794698755

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

That number seems rather lower than expected. £42bn/month.
The danger is that a lot of the tax revenues are lagging, so government income held up more than expected through Q1, but will drop off a cliff over the next year.

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

That number seems rather lower than expected. £42bn/month.
The danger is that a lot of the tax revenues are lagging, so government income held up more than expected through Q1, but will drop off a Cliff over the next year.

The January figures will be, err, interesting.

NickPalmer said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

I have to agree. Without the hype, the news is that it has passed phase 1 trials which means only that it doesn't immediately kill people stone dead. The overtones of "all over by Christmas" seem to be lost on the headline writers.

"Die-effects" = side-effects presumably, though it comes to the same thing.

Perhaps so, but data from human trials was published for four different vaccines yesterday, and all showed the production of neutralising antibodies and T cells.

It’s not going to be over by Christmas, but the strong prospect of effective vaccines is there. In the meantime, the widespread use of masks would ensure the least disruption to our lives.

That sounds about right. Phase 1 trials are no big deal - pharma is littered with drugs that passed that stage and never made it to market because they didn't work or produced significant side-effects later. But the parallel progress is impressive, and the chance that there will be improved treatment by, say, early next year and a vaccine that works for many people by the end of 2021 looks quite promising.

Caution and masks remain essential for the time being, as you say.

If the BBC is right there are three vaccines in phase 3 trials now.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

Sandpit said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Having just read through last night’s thread can I add “free movement” to the “accurate but misleading” column?

Yes. FoM means something very specific in the context of the EU, namely the right to live and work - in the U.K. this means the right to an NI number, state benefits and NHS treatment - nothing at all to do with rights of entry at border crossings.

The state benefits and automatic right to NHS treatment is the reason we have Brexit, if Blair and Brown had sorted that out as they invited Eastern Europe here we wouldn't have this mess.

tlg86 said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

That number seems rather lower than expected. £42bn/month.
The danger is that a lot of the tax revenues are lagging, so government income held up more than expected through Q1, but will drop off a Cliff over the next year.

The January figures will be, err, interesting.

The January figures will be, err, terrifying.

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

The £310bn is the total that was announced in June, it won't be completed until year-end, and it includes £10-20bn of corporate bonds do gilt purchases will be a bit under £300bn. Total borrowing in FY20-21 will likely be close to £400bn so it's likely that net issuance net of BOE purchases will still be positive - although the BOE may buy more in Q1 2021 (the last quarter of the fiscal year). However, for the year to date the BOE purchases have been greater than net isduance, as they were front-loaded with aggressive buying at the start.

Fysics_Teacher said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

Not if the £130 billion is on top of the quantitative easing...

I don't believe it is.

The Quantitatively Eased debt is still accounted for as debt within the national figures and still counted as borrowing. Hence referring to "real" debt that the media very, very rarely does.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

The £310bn is the total that was announced in June, it won't be completed until year-end, and it includes £10-20bn of corporate bonds do gilt purchases will be a bit under £300bn. Total borrowing in FY20-21 will likely be close to £400bn so it's likely that net issuance net of BOE purchases will still be positive - although the BOE may buy more in Q1 2021 (the last quarter of the fiscal year). However, for the year to date the BOE purchases have been greater than net isduance, as they were front-loaded with aggressive buying at the start.

Thanks. So net there might be some real borrowing by the government but a tiny fraction of what is being touted in these headlines.

What a shame that no journalists seem to be economically literate or wanting to give the full picture rather than just spout off massive numbers.

noneoftheabove said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

NickPalmer said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

I have to agree. Without the hype, the news is that it has passed phase 1 trials which means only that it doesn't immediately kill people stone dead. The overtones of "all over by Christmas" seem to be lost on the headline writers.

"Die-effects" = side-effects presumably, though it comes to the same thing.

Perhaps so, but data from human trials was published for four different vaccines yesterday, and all showed the production of neutralising antibodies and T cells.

It’s not going to be over by Christmas, but the strong prospect of effective vaccines is there. In the meantime, the widespread use of masks would ensure the least disruption to our lives.

That sounds about right. Phase 1 trials are no big deal - pharma is littered with drugs that passed that stage and never made it to market because they didn't work or produced significant side-effects later. But the parallel progress is impressive, and the chance that there will be improved treatment by, say, early next year and a vaccine that works for many people by the end of 2021 looks quite promising.

Caution and masks remain essential for the time being, as you say.

If the BBC is right there are three vaccines in phase 3 trials now.

NYT has 4

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-vaccine-tracker.html

One of those is BCG, the TB vaccine! I assume they skipped the safety trials and went straight for phase 3.

If it does work then I should be fine given the amount of BCG I’ve had put into me over the last few years.

Foxy said:

NickPalmer said:

Nigelb said:

IshmaelZ said:

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

I have to agree. Without the hype, the news is that it has passed phase 1 trials which means only that it doesn't immediately kill people stone dead. The overtones of "all over by Christmas" seem to be lost on the headline writers.

"Die-effects" = side-effects presumably, though it comes to the same thing.

Perhaps so, but data from human trials was published for four different vaccines yesterday, and all showed the production of neutralising antibodies and T cells.

It’s not going to be over by Christmas, but the strong prospect of effective vaccines is there. In the meantime, the widespread use of masks would ensure the least disruption to our lives.

That sounds about right. Phase 1 trials are no big deal - pharma is littered with drugs that passed that stage and never made it to market because they didn't work or produced significant side-effects later. But the parallel progress is impressive, and the chance that there will be improved treatment by, say, early next year and a vaccine that works for many people by the end of 2021 looks quite promising.

Caution and masks remain essential for the time being, as you say.

In many ways the inhaled interferon announcement sounds even more important. There is real progress in therapeutics too.

A vaccine is essential though before hospitals and primary care can function normally again. The slow productivity from PPE and social distancing has more than halved productivity.

It was explained to me that the oxford trial indicates a similar immune response to injections of plasma from recovered patients, which is seen as slightly disappointing. It’s not a silver bullet. But who cares. We just need to get the mortality and hospitalisation rates sufficiently low that we can all get back to our lives.

At some point in the minds of the media and much of the public, the purpose of lockdown and social distancing has morphed from “flatten the curve” to “eliminate all risk”. With community infection rates as low as they are, the cure risks being worse than ailment. Roll out this vaccine, declare Mission Accomplished, stop with the daily doom stats and lets all crack on with our lives.

A certain number of annual deaths from infectious disease is a regrettable but unavoidable part of life. I don’t much care if the culprit calls itself Influenza or SARS Cov 2 or Big Barry, so long as the health impact is kept in balance with social and economic factors.

Sandpit said:

eek said:

Sandpit said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Having just read through last night’s thread can I add “free movement” to the “accurate but misleading” column?

Yes. FoM means something very specific in the context of the EU, namely the right to live and work - in the U.K. this means the right to an NI number, state benefits and NHS treatment - nothing at all to do with rights of entry at border crossings.

The state benefits and automatic right to NHS treatment is the reason we have Brexit, if Blair and Brown had sorted that out as they invited Eastern Europe here we wouldn't have this mess.

Yes, the eastward expansion of the EU was badly handled by the U.K. It should have been blindingly obvious that, when UK minimum wage was higher than the average annual income of 200m people, there would be a lot of immigration.

The lack of the transition period seen in other EU countries focussed all that immigration at the U.K rather than spreading it across the western EU, also helped by the universality of the English language.

A non-contributory benefits system, including in-work benefits, was the icing on the cake.

The lack of transition wasn't as big a factor as is often touted. As proof of that look at how much Romanian migration to the UK there has been.

Pre-Eastward expansion the two biggest foreign nationalities in the UK were I believe Indian and Irish. Now the two biggest are Polish and Romanian and that was with the maximum possible transition controls imposed on Romanian migration . . . all imposing controls meant was that the migration was delayed for a few years not that it didn't happen.

rkrkrk said:

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

I fear the news about the vaccine has been over-hyped. Even if it is genuinely good news, it's surely unlikely that it will be available by Christmas, and it's by no means unusual for die-effects to become evident after widespread use.
Sorry to be such a dismal Jimmy, but experience of medicines over 40+ years leads one to be cautious.

Even if the vaccine isn't for you, the spread of the virus can be meaningfully slowed by making sure that (young) front line workers get it.

I think there's some suggestion that the vaccine may improve your response to the virus so that you don't die or perhaps even get seriously ill, but that it wouldn't stop you spreading it on. The macaque study of Oxford vaccine found they still had high levels of virus replicating in their airways.

Team Oxford-AstraZeneca argues it’s not realistic to expect clear nasal swabs from monkeys after they got a whopping dose straight up their noses. “It doesn’t need to cure you of SARS-CoV-2,” AstraZeneca’s Pangalos says. “I don’t know if we will completely knock out shedding or people being infectious, whether we’re going to cure people completely or whether we will just dampen down the illness. We want a vaccine to stop people from going to hospital and dying. If you can do that, I think people will be pretty happy."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-07-15/oxford-s-covid-19-vaccine-is-the-coronavirus-front-runner

coach said:

OldKingCole said:

coach said:

There's every chance a vaccine will create as many problems as it solves, unless its compulsory for everybody (which is impossible to monitor) its largely irrelevant.

Like every other virus ever this just has to run its course as it already is. I appreciate that gets the scaredy cats in a tizz but its reality.

I don't think that as an elderly man who is mildly asthmatic I could fairly be described as a 'scaredy-cat'. I'm very worried by the prospect of the virus.

However, as one who, at a local level was involved with school vaccination campaigns..... meningitis etc ....... I do wonder about the way a mass vaccination campaign will be conducted, if Hancock gets anywhere near it!

Its nothing to do with Hancock, who is useless. Lots of people will refuse the vaccine, others just won't bother.

My point is that the vaccine itself will not be the solution

I believe polling already suggests around 85% would get vaccinated. I suspect it would be higher than that for a proven effective vaccine, once people realised that meant a return to normal life without restrictions.

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

City not playing along with government’s wish to get everyone working from offices again:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/20/rbs-tells-50000-workers-not-return-office-2021/

Does the government wish to get everyone working from offices again? This seems to be the wish of some backbenchers and some in the media but the government and the PM seem to be clear their only priority is getting people back to work safely not getting back to offices. If back to work means working from home so be it.

And why shouldn't that be the case. Some businesses will never return to their offices and that could improve efficiency . . . great!

Agree; many people have had a new experience and I suggest that, given the other currently necessary, restrictions, the change is going to have been for long enough that people don't just go back to 'what is was like before'.
n=1 etc, but I'm sure my neighbour won't go back to a daily commute, when he's been working from home apparently just as efficiently and seeing his family at lunchtime.

Philip_Thompson said:

Sandpit said:

City not playing along with government’s wish to get everyone working from offices again:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/20/rbs-tells-50000-workers-not-return-office-2021/

Does the government wish to get everyone working from offices again? This seems to be the wish of some backbenchers and some in the media but the government and the PM seem to be clear their only priority is getting people back to work safely not getting back to offices. If back to work means working from home so be it.

And why shouldn't that be the case. Some businesses will never return to their offices and that could improve efficiency . . . great!

PM clear? Did Boris resign overnight?

SouthamObserver said:

Sandpit said:

City not playing along with government’s wish to get everyone working from offices again:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/20/rbs-tells-50000-workers-not-return-office-2021/

Businesses will do what is best for them and their shareholders. Even this government must understand that.

Quite. Even banks with, one might assume, significant liabilities on commercial real estate.

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/tomkington/status/1285449055196372992

Better still, swab everybody as they enter the *departure* airport, and avoid one person infecting others on the plane over who then in the first few hours of their infection would likely show up as negative on a swab at the destination...

rottenborough said:

Morning all,

Have we discussed the change in planning law the government is proposing. Two storey extensions can be built with almost no need for any planning input from council? "prior approval service" will be the assumption.

I'm pretty sure where I am this will be a buy-to-let bonanza as professional landlords snap up property and immediately bolt on 2 stories going way out the back to allow for a HMO to be set up.

They might but I suspect they will lose a lot of money - the demand for a small room close to work is going to disappear when you work from home and so spend most of the day in the same place..

eek said:

rottenborough said:

Morning all,

Have we discussed the change in planning law the government is proposing. Two storey extensions can be built with almost no need for any planning input from council? "prior approval service" will be the assumption.

I'm pretty sure where I am this will be a buy-to-let bonanza as professional landlords snap up property and immediately bolt on 2 stories going way out the back to allow for a HMO to be set up.

They might but I suspect they will lose a lot of money - the demand for a small room close to work is going to disappear when you work from home and so spend most of the day in the same place..

What it might do is allow a lot of people to build home offices as separate rooms rather than using a spare bedroom...

Philip_Thompson said:

Fysics_Teacher said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

Not if the £130 billion is on top of the quantitative easing...

I don't believe it is.

The Quantitatively Eased debt is still accounted for as debt within the national figures and still counted as borrowing. Hence referring to "real" debt that the media very, very rarely does.

As I understand the Bank of England buys the government's debts (via buying gilts in the open market). The UK Government still has debt. The Bank has the gilts. The Bank is not the UK Government.

What they do with the gilts in the medium term is anyone's guess.

Philip_Thompson said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/1285461607250833408

Can some please confirm if I'm barking up the wrong tree here . . .

But if the Government "borrowed" £130 billion ($165 billion) by June.
And if the Bank of England have done £310 billion of Quantitative Easing by June: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/quantitative-easing


Then doesn't that mean we are in net LESS real debt than we were before this hit?

The £310bn is the total that was announced in June, it won't be completed until year-end, and it includes £10-20bn of corporate bonds do gilt purchases will be a bit under £300bn. Total borrowing in FY20-21 will likely be close to £400bn so it's likely that net issuance net of BOE purchases will still be positive - although the BOE may buy more in Q1 2021 (the last quarter of the fiscal year). However, for the year to date the BOE purchases have been greater than net isduance, as they were front-loaded with aggressive buying at the start.

Thanks. So net there might be some real borrowing by the government but a tiny fraction of what is being touted in these headlines.

What a shame that no journalists seem to be economically literate or wanting to give the full picture rather than just spout off massive numbers.

Yes the standards of economic journalism in this country are pretty bad, journalism in general in fact. And then we let these ignorant hacks run the country (Johnson and Gove) and wonder why everything goes to shit. Basically, most of what is written about the economy outside of the FT and BBC is rubbish.
The BOE covering most or all of net issuance is a repeat of 2009. If they do the same again, the big build up of debt net of BOE purchases will happen in subsequent years. Government borrowing will almost certainly stay elevated for several years from here.