The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
New York saying they have seen a decline in the number of positive tests with hospital admissions over the past 3 days.
Also on the testing front, sounds like an antibody test will be available on a massive scale in days not weeks.0 -
Any idea how they intend to undertake the antibody testing and how long it would take to get results?kingstonian said:New York saying they have seen a decline in the number of positive tests with hospital admissions over the past 3 days.
Also on the testing front, sounds like an antibody test will be available on a massive scale in days not weeks.0 -
What do you think happens to an economy when you overwhelm the health system?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.0 -
All I have read is that it would be via a blood pin prick, and it may well be that you either pop into a GP surgery or somewhere like Boots and have it administered. Don't know how quickly the test result would be available (ie whether it would be instantaneous or take hours/days). But it would be a major step forwards nonetheless.0
-
Why do you assume that is the only outcome?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.
Is our economy going to suffer a severe shock? Undoubtedly.
Bojo says 12 weeks. You or I can interpret that however we like in terms of probability.
However, they’re working to a timetable, not indefinite bail out.
Personally, I think we are establishing what levers we have. In 12 weeks things won’t be normal, we will however be working out what is manageable.
China figures are to be treated with caution but I think it is safe to say that infection rates can be influenced.
The difficult decisions come around acceptable death to productivity ratio. Letting it loose is simply an absurd risk that nobody is going to take where there is an option not to.
Like I say the barometer is the developing world.
Are you actually advocating no action?0 -
So we agree there are no easy choices? But you are making a prediction that what has happened in Wuhan and Northern Italy WILL happen here, despite the different demographics and circumstances. Look, you've got your way, we're pursuing the strategy that you appear to favour. I'm simply dissenting and suggesting that it might be wrong and something we will regret for decades to come in terms of reduced standards of living, poorer services, reduced pensions, higher taxes and with no actual proof that it will save the deaths you claim it will or that following more pragmatic measures would be any worse.kingstongraham said:
What do you think happens to an economy when you overwhelm the health system?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.0 -
Is it really unbelievable that people will believe a known serial liar because he says positive things in a positive way?elbowloh said:
I believe his approval numbers have actually been increasing. Unbelievable really.Pross said:Trump still convinced it will all be over by Easter. Surely even those who usually give him the benefit of the doubt must be questioning his sanity now?
0 -
hahaha, just saw the swear filter kicked in within my post above, how stupid0
-
thegreasedscotsman said:
Any employment lawyers out there? My current employer is now talking about furloughing most of it's staff, but I'm currently working my notice with them, due to leave on the 3rd April. Do I have to accept this from them? Should I hold out for a full final salary from them?
IANAL but if I understand correctly are you talking about 20% of 7 (at most) days salary? if so then I think the effort to fight it will outweigh the gain.0 -
I'm assuming it as the likely outcome of the largest public borrowing binge in 30 years heaped on an economy that is already 2 trillion in debt not accounting for future public sector pension provision. It might not be the only outcome and I hope you're nearer the mark than I am.morstar said:
Why do you assume that is the only outcome?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.
Is our economy going to suffer a severe shock? Undoubtedly.
Bojo says 12 weeks. You or I can interpret that however we like in terms of probability.
However, they’re working to a timetable, not indefinite bail out.
Personally, I think we are establishing what levers we have. In 12 weeks things won’t be normal, we will however be working out what is manageable.
China figures are to be treated with caution but I think it is safe to say that infection rates can be influenced.
The difficult decisions come around acceptable death to productivity ratio. Letting it loose is simply an absurd risk that nobody is going to take where there is an option not to.
Like I say the barometer is the developing world.
Are you actually advocating no action?0 -
tailwindhome said:
The antibodies, 'have you already had it' test could be days away.
I remain convinced that with unlimited resources the scientists will find solutions in closer to 18 weeks than 18 months0 -
There is a position between "let's shut everything down for 18 months and live off soil", and "bye bye old people, you had a decent innings but needs must, I've got a house to pay for".
It makes sense to say "let's not overwhelm the health system, save some lives, slow the spread down, deliberately restrict the economy while we get past the first peak, and then see how bad it is, and what can safely be restarted". People still going to work where they hardly interact with anyone makes perfect sense at the moment.0 -
Fair comment if that's all that is going to happen. Big IF mind you. What of the claim that only a 6.5 percent reduction in GDP will lead to more deaths indirectly than predicted will be caused by the virus?kingstongraham said:There is a position between "let's shut everything down for 18 months and live off soil", and "bye bye old people, you had a decent innings but needs must, I've got a house to pay for".
It makes sense to say "let's not overwhelm the health system, save some lives, slow the spread down, deliberately restrict the economy while we get past the first peak, and then see how bad it is, and what can safely be restarted". People still going to work where they hardly interact with anyone makes perfect sense at the moment.0 -
Your argument is fairly mainstream (if controversial) economics and is used daily to make decisions on the appropriate level of safety or whether the NHS will provide a new drug.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
However on this occasion what really scares me into supporting the most extreme lockdown as soon as possible is that the Govt of China did exactly the same sums and locked down whole regions as hard as they can.And that is scary because the Chinese Govt places close to zero value on the price of life.
0 -
From Twitter and to add balance. I checked the figures and they are backed up on the NHSsurrey_commuter said:
Your argument is fairly mainstream (if controversial) economics and is used daily to make decisions on the appropriate level of safety or whether the NHS will provide a new drug.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
However on this occasion what really scares me into supporting the most extreme lockdown as soon as possible is that the Govt of China did exactly the same sums and locked down whole regions as hard as they can.And that is scary because the Chinese Govt places close to zero value on the price of life.
https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/lifestyle/what-are-the-health-risks-of-smoking/
"There will be around 1,800 smoking-related deaths in the UK this week. Many casualties will spend their final hours gasping for breath in stretched intensive care wards. There will be no selfie videos and no public fuss. Most of these deaths will have been totally preventable."1 -
Cvnts were always going to bankrupt us, this way we just get there quickershortfall said:
I'm assuming it as the likely outcome of the largest public borrowing binge in 30 years heaped on an economy that is already 2 trillion in debt not accounting for future public sector pension provision. It might not be the only outcome and I hope you're nearer the mark than I am.morstar said:
Why do you assume that is the only outcome?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.
Is our economy going to suffer a severe shock? Undoubtedly.
Bojo says 12 weeks. You or I can interpret that however we like in terms of probability.
However, they’re working to a timetable, not indefinite bail out.
Personally, I think we are establishing what levers we have. In 12 weeks things won’t be normal, we will however be working out what is manageable.
China figures are to be treated with caution but I think it is safe to say that infection rates can be influenced.
The difficult decisions come around acceptable death to productivity ratio. Letting it loose is simply an absurd risk that nobody is going to take where there is an option not to.
Like I say the barometer is the developing world.
Are you actually advocating no action?
Or you believe there is no harm in borrowing and just borrow some more. Govt knew this sh1t was coming at them fast and they still approved the largest fiscal expansion in peacetime. Couldn’t even bring themselves to cancel HS2. Unbelievably the Budget was only two weeks ago0 -
surrey_commuter said:tailwindhome said:
The antibodies, 'have you already had it' test could be days away.
I remain convinced that with unlimited resources the scientists will find solutions in closer to 18 weeks than 18 months
This is merely a test to see if you have antibodies to Coronavirus in your system, not a vaccination.0 -
Pinched from elsewhere.
Prince Charles is isolating in Scotland with Covid-19. Prince Andrew is isolating in Windsor with Jennifer-14.
Oh go on, snigger at least.0 -
The cost of servicing that debt as a proportion of GDP (pre-virus) was almost at a record low however.shortfall said:
I'm assuming it as the likely outcome of the largest public borrowing binge in 30 years heaped on an economy that is already 2 trillion in debt not accounting for future public sector pension provision. It might not be the only outcome and I hope you're nearer the mark than I am.morstar said:
Why do you assume that is the only outcome?shortfall said:
What do you think happens to health services when you collapse an economy?morstar said:
Italy’s health service is at critical with a lock down. What do you think happens with uncontrolled virus spread.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
Even if you ignore anybody over arbitrary age x, it most likely collapses.
Take the 50% infection figure as some benchmark of hope. I do not see how that figure is remotely plausible given the timeline when doing an ad hoc comparison to swine flu.
Is our economy going to suffer a severe shock? Undoubtedly.
Bojo says 12 weeks. You or I can interpret that however we like in terms of probability.
However, they’re working to a timetable, not indefinite bail out.
Personally, I think we are establishing what levers we have. In 12 weeks things won’t be normal, we will however be working out what is manageable.
China figures are to be treated with caution but I think it is safe to say that infection rates can be influenced.
The difficult decisions come around acceptable death to productivity ratio. Letting it loose is simply an absurd risk that nobody is going to take where there is an option not to.
Like I say the barometer is the developing world.
Are you actually advocating no action?
Don't be blinded by big numbers. Look at proportions - it's easier.0 -
Reading the Times article about it, they are clear that it is an article published before peer review of the modelling behind it, and the "link between mortality and the economy is clear, but not simple." Also that "the strength of the link between increased GDP and longevity also flattens off the richer a country gets."shortfall said:
Fair comment if that's all that is going to happen. Big IF mind you. What of the claim that only a 6.5 percent reduction in GDP will lead to more deaths indirectly than predicted will be caused by the virus?kingstongraham said:There is a position between "let's shut everything down for 18 months and live off soil", and "bye bye old people, you had a decent innings but needs must, I've got a house to pay for".
It makes sense to say "let's not overwhelm the health system, save some lives, slow the spread down, deliberately restrict the economy while we get past the first peak, and then see how bad it is, and what can safely be restarted". People still going to work where they hardly interact with anyone makes perfect sense at the moment.
I know it's easy for me to say, working from my kitchen, but at the moment, given what has happened in Italy, Spain, and NY, an abundance of caution seems advisable.
We're all going to help pay for it when it's all over.0 -
P
I did not say this was the solutionkingstonian said:surrey_commuter said:tailwindhome said:The antibodies, 'have you already had it' test could be days away.
I remain convinced that with unlimited resources the scientists will find solutions in closer to 18 weeks than 18 months
This is merely a test to see if you have antibodies to Coronavirus in your system, not a vaccination.0 -
Korea probably meets that description.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
0 -
South Korea, I presume. God knows the approach that North Korea has taken ( I shudder to think).....
In South Korea they went very fast and very hard at identifying contacts of every confirmed Coronavirus patient, and isolated them. They implemented a mechanism to ping your phone when you were in the vicinity of a property housing a known patient. Both were learnt from handling previous epidemics but seem to have been really effective approaches.0 -
For those saying Boris is trigger happy with a lockdown I think he was behind private enterprise. If you think back he was pre-empted by all sports bodies (except Cheltenham) and the week before his lockdown tube travel was down 20% and visually looked lower Mon/Tues the following week.0
-
Republic of Korea if you want to be pedantic.
The north (DPRK for the pedants) doesn't have much movement of people at the best of times, so is likely to be less badly affected.0 -
There was a joke doing the rounds that the DPRK has a golden bullet solution for the virus.TheBigBean said:Republic of Korea if you want to be pedantic.
The north (DPRK for the pedants) doesn't have much movement of people at the best of times, so is likely to be less badly affected.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The really scary thing for me is that I think that you are both correct.shortfall said:
These things can't be measured after a matter of weeks. Let's see how it looks after a few months. Let's see if you still agree with the lockdown when the economy collapses and there's no money to pay your pension, or to provide the NHS as we know it, or your employer has gone bust, and that of your partner.Pross said:
Name a country that has taken less stringent measures than us that is in a better place in terms of death rate at the same point of the timeline. Our Government went out of the way to try to get support measures in place before trying to shut things down.shortfall said:
17000 people will die on average each year in the UK from influenza. How do we know the mortality rate from Coronavirus when the testing is virtually non existent? Can we accurately compare our own population to that of Northern Italy which has suffered more than other countries? A study from the university of Oxford suggests that 50 percent of the UK population could have already be infected. We are literally betting the ranch on the lockdown strategy when the science is conflicting.morstar said:
Calm heads and objectivity are critical.shortfall said:
You have my sympathy Malcolm. The government's current strategy appears to have changed following the publishing of a model by imperial College predicting hundreds of thousands of deaths if it stuck to it's original plan. However the same college was behind recommending the mass slaughter of healthy cattle during the foot and mouth outbreak of 2001, a policy which has since been widely criticised and condemned. Scientists have different opinions and government's should look to them for advice, but if the cure is worse than the disease then where does that leave us? If we crash our economy in pursuing well meaning but damaging strategies that ultimately lead indirectly to more deaths than would be caused by the virus then what is the point? At the moment unfortunately any dissenting voices are drowned out by the self righteous mob who will suggest that anyone who questions the lockdown want people to die or are cranks and conspiracy theorists. Calm heads are needed here.thecycleclinic said:
If that's the case I go bankrupt. There is no salary support for me as I am.a director of my company. Will you feed me and house me. Thought not. Neither will the government. Also when this is over very few will have a job and the whole nation is screwed.Pross said:The amount of people I read say something along the lines of 'it's really busy still everywhere with people ignoring the lockdown. I saw so many people when I was driving home from work but I have to go out as I can't work from home'.
The Government need to just make it simple and say you only travel for work if designated as a key worker. They've put the financial support in place to try to help those who wouldn't be able to work from home and it sounds like measures for the self-employed are coming in once it has been worked out how best to do it.
At the other end of the scale one of my wife's staff has just asked if she needs to self-isolate as she looked after her niece and nephew whose father's gran has been confirmed as having the virus. The kids don't even live with the father but the staff member is in a right panic!
I might have topped myself by them through sheer depression. Well I probably wont but many will.
There is a danger the cure is worse than the disease in our desperation and panic to avert deaths we instead condemn the whole nation to poverty from which there is no coming out of. Things seem fine now but if society start to break down in 12 months time ith food shortages and we dont have a vaccine we will wonder do we just let the old die so the rest of us can live.
People need to think through what they are saying. If people cant earn then there is no state as the state needs peoples wealth to fucntion.
This will.not be over in 3 months or even 6. 12 at least. We have to work even if it's for our own personal sanity.
I actually think just using death rates as a catch all for the lock down is equally an unfair criticism of arguments you don’t agree with.
If it was just an old generation dying quietly with little intervention when they would have died anyway, it would be more widely tolerable.
But, it isn’t that, it’s lots of people needing intensive care that massively exceeds capacity. Much of which is in people who have a good chance of a long and healthy life to follow.
They won’t if this runs riot. And do you really think things are going to run normally if a huge proportion of the workforce are sick and the health service can only handle the virus?
Things will stop working then in a totally uncontrolled way.
But, we can all take comfort that the developing world will give us a good barometer of what happens without any controls. For their sake, I hope it’s not as devastating as we are led to believe. But then again, we’re used to them dying.
I suggest moving to the US if you want things to go back to normal in days rather than months. Good luck!
We're doomed, doomed I tell ye.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Thanks for the replies Pross and morstar
I think it's more than that. It's backdated to the beginning of March. And also have 6 days holiday they owe me for as well.surrey_commuter said:thegreasedscotsman said:Any employment lawyers out there? My current employer is now talking about furloughing most of it's staff, but I'm currently working my notice with them, due to leave on the 3rd April. Do I have to accept this from them? Should I hold out for a full final salary from them?
IANAL but if I understand correctly are you talking about 20% of 7 (at most) days salary? if so then I think the effort to fight it will outweigh the gain.
I'm a bit concerned about the new job I'm going to, no idea what's going to happen there. Maybe I'll need everybit of cash I can get hold of at the moment.
Haven't spoken to any accounts or HR person yet, I'll see what they say, but maybe give a little push against it, see what happens.0 -
Japan's gdp has been rocky since 1990. Their life expectancy has gone up linearly (albeit very slightly)kingstongraham said:
Reading the Times article about it, they are clear that it is an article published before peer review of the modelling behind it, and the "link between mortality and the economy is clear, but not simple." Also that "the strength of the link between increased GDP and longevity also flattens off the richer a country gets."shortfall said:
Fair comment if that's all that is going to happen. Big IF mind you. What of the claim that only a 6.5 percent reduction in GDP will lead to more deaths indirectly than predicted will be caused by the virus?kingstongraham said:There is a position between "let's shut everything down for 18 months and live off soil", and "bye bye old people, you had a decent innings but needs must, I've got a house to pay for".
It makes sense to say "let's not overwhelm the health system, save some lives, slow the spread down, deliberately restrict the economy while we get past the first peak, and then see how bad it is, and what can safely be restarted". People still going to work where they hardly interact with anyone makes perfect sense at the moment.
I know it's easy for me to say, working from my kitchen, but at the moment, given what has happened in Italy, Spain, and NY, an abundance of caution seems advisable.
We're all going to help pay for it when it's all over.
0
