The big Coronavirus thread

kingstongraham

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

coopster_the_1st said:

Pross said:

briantrumpet said:

Seems that someone at The Telegraph is a fan of Trump's plan to let the old and vulnerable die to 'save the economy'. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/26/lockdown-wests-berlin-wall-moment-elite-managerialism-collapses/

"He should pay heed to Trump, who is raring to get America up and running by Easter lest the cure be worst than the disease. Premature perhaps, but at least he is forcing Americans to frankly debate the trade-offs: millions of livelihoods versus thousands of lives."

FTR, the "thousands" is likely to be passed in the next few days, unless she really meant tens, hundreds, or thousands of thousands. But, hey, what's a decimal point, when it's only old people and people who are a drain on tax payers and don't make a financial contribution to the economy?

Coopster has got a job at The Telegraph?

Let's see how much you are moaning when you are struggling to pay the bills and feed your family in a few months time!

The cost benefit of life happens all the time in medicine when new drugs are considered by NICE.

This is no different except the scale.

Unless we lockdown for 18+ months while waiting for a vaccine we won't avoid tens of thousands, if not 100k+ deaths but if we are locked down for 18+ months we as a country won't be able to afford the vaccine anyway.

Who has suggested a total lockdown for 18 months? That doesn't appear to be remotely on the cards. We've been at it barely a week. As for this only affecting old people who would die soon anyway, that's clearly not the case. The effects are more severe in the elderly those with underlying conditions, but it's far from a trivial illness even in the young and healthy.

This isn't a total lockdown. Just look at Italy, Spain or France for possible future steps. This lockdown is doing enough economic damage as it is. Just look across at the USA to see a 3m increase in umemployment in a week as an example.

A question I've yet to see asked, let alone answered, is what are the steps we will take to reverse the lockdown?

It's not like on 1st May the government can announce all pubs can open as you'll have 30m people going to the pub!
Anything that is unlocked will now just get swarmed in large numbers thus forcing it to be locked down again almost immediately.

Right now we need less moral posturing and more pragmatism

If people are still dying in large numbers, people will still gather much less. It won't be a single almighty release and everyone throws a big party UNLESS it feels safe.

The economy depends on us getting the health bit right.

Wheelspinner

bompington said:

Jeremy.89 said:

I think, given that the Chinese government isn't known for putting lives ahead of the economy, their total shutdown of Wuhan is a pretty stark suggestion of how serious they considered Covid to be.

The Chinese government is also not known for missing an opportunity to crank up its authoritarianism. Perfect opportunity to trial a few extra levels of surveillance and control.

Two news items here this week :

- Chinese state-owned businesses here were tasked with buying up literal plane-loads of medical supplies and repacking to send back to China in Jan and Feb, leaving shortages here.
- Inquiries indicate that China corporate “investment” is already looking to buy up struggling companies and assets now this virus has decimated the economic system.

Not hard to see why the conspiracy theorists think this was a deliberate bio-terrorism act. China loses 80,000 (allegedly) people, manages to switch it off like a tap, but gains ownership of major tranches of world economic assets at bargain prices. Their cost/benefit analysis would count that as a win I’m sure.

rjsterry

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

coopster_the_1st said:

Pross said:

briantrumpet said:

Seems that someone at The Telegraph is a fan of Trump's plan to let the old and vulnerable die to 'save the economy'. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/26/lockdown-wests-berlin-wall-moment-elite-managerialism-collapses/

"He should pay heed to Trump, who is raring to get America up and running by Easter lest the cure be worst than the disease. Premature perhaps, but at least he is forcing Americans to frankly debate the trade-offs: millions of livelihoods versus thousands of lives."

FTR, the "thousands" is likely to be passed in the next few days, unless she really meant tens, hundreds, or thousands of thousands. But, hey, what's a decimal point, when it's only old people and people who are a drain on tax payers and don't make a financial contribution to the economy?

Coopster has got a job at The Telegraph?

Let's see how much you are moaning when you are struggling to pay the bills and feed your family in a few months time!

The cost benefit of life happens all the time in medicine when new drugs are considered by NICE.

This is no different except the scale.

Unless we lockdown for 18+ months while waiting for a vaccine we won't avoid tens of thousands, if not 100k+ deaths but if we are locked down for 18+ months we as a country won't be able to afford the vaccine anyway.

Who has suggested a total lockdown for 18 months? That doesn't appear to be remotely on the cards. We've been at it barely a week. As for this only affecting old people who would die soon anyway, that's clearly not the case. The effects are more severe in the elderly those with underlying conditions, but it's far from a trivial illness even in the young and healthy.

This isn't a total lockdown. Just look at Italy, Spain or France for possible future steps. This lockdown is doing enough economic damage as it is. Just look across at the USA to see a 3m increase in umemployment in a week as an example.

A question I've yet to see asked, let alone answered, is what are the steps we will take to reverse the lockdown?

It's not like on 1st May the government can announce all pubs can open as you'll have 30m people going to the pub!
Anything that is unlocked will now just get swarmed in large numbers thus forcing it to be locked down again almost immediately.

Right now we need less moral posturing and more pragmatism

I really don't see any of this moral posturing that you talk about. I see people worried that members of their immediate family will be lost at a few days notice. And what exactly do you mean by pragmatism. For sure we need to consider the effect on the economy but what practical steps do you suggest? This would be having a major impact on the economy through sheer quantity of lost time to sickness even if there no fatalities at all.

bompington

rjsterry said:

And what exactly do you mean by pragmatism.

I think Coopster should go the whole hog and do it Logan's run style. Can't get more pragmatic than that.
You over 30, Coops?

pblakeney

A (not so) subtle reminder that this can kill anyone. Including under 30s.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/25/uk-woman-21-with-no-health-issues-dies-from-covid-19-family-say

thecycleclinic

Had one guy message me this morning offering me cash for a part he pick up. It was a cheeky offer as well. I may be hard up but not stupid. Social distancing and all I replied. PayPal and I'll post. I'll leave it then he says.

I did respond to him and told him in my normal blunt manner that it's not appropriate to make a journey to pick up a part that could be posted.

He said I was rude. I posted our exchange on facebook. Some poor just dont get it do they.

On monday some one dropped in to get a wheel tried. Slightly out of true he said. Not an essential journey he said. He turned up at 9:30am because I said a week earlier I was planning to open as normal. In that week the world turned upside down yet he expected normality and tried to hold me to account without using the 2m distance later that day. I got in at 10am. He didn't leave his wheel. I am not bothered hes not a customer now. He will stay away and fine by me.

The issue is why are these people still out there.

I wont be open on saturday. I cant post that day so there no point is there.

My concern is not now while its tight I'll get though the next couple of months. Once the current wave of infections passes in 3 months movement restrictions can be relaxed perhaps but that wi mean another wave come autumn or winter. People will have lost there jobs by then and businesses will be on life support and will find it hard to hire.

Once the economy is stopped it going to be hard to jump start it when it could be shut down again next winter.

I think that the point where there be a different strategy of letting the those not at risk and those who have been infected and recovered work and live in near normality and those at risk isolate.

Its going to be a long year.

I still wont be able to see my parents at christmas but I might be able to see my sister.

That's how I see things panning out as the alternative is collapse.

Cooperthe1st
Free discussion is essential. We disagreed about brexit but that's fine.

To question is important. Sometimes the unpopular questions are the best to ask. Its how a democracy works.

Italy has a big problem. It getting the rate of increase of infections in the north to.reduce
Sadly cases in the south are rising so less equipped hospitals are going to be overwhelmed. The death rate will rise sharply. One thing about southern Italians. They move about less. They are very local folk. That might be there saving grace.

I do wonder if in 6 month or a year if italy is going to run into serious problems that push it out of the euro or can germany save it again.

I do wonder how Europeanswill.view the eu after this crisis has abated. I dont thing the schengen zone is coming back to.life soon. Cross boarder movement controls cant come back until theres an effective vaccine. 12 months or more without freedom of movement.

We spent more than 3 years trying to get out of freedom.of movement and the eu and a bloddy virus comes along and shuts freedom of movement down, make the eu irrelevant, makes the nation state very relevant and unifies nations like never before.

Rishi has not helped directors. Directors cant stip working for there company. If they do it sort of the end isnt it. At least he helping others who might spend a bit of it. Not all bad. To be honest the tories are not so bad at present are they. They almost look like they give a shit.

I'm rambling time for bed.

thecycleclinic

One funny from italy. In calabria there a town called scalea. The new mayor of scalea replaced the old one who was on the take (its italy) and is a bit of a populist, ordered concrete block on one of the back roads to the town that lead to the motorway so out of towners cant get in easily. This also blocked access out of the nearby village of Santa Dominica talao. So if an ambulance or other important vehicle needs to get through they had to call.and wait for jcb to move the blocks. The blocks have been ordered by the government to be removed but still, they went up.

rick_chasey

I would normally expect this to put coopster’s argument to bed but he can’t read properly.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3561560

Today’s important academic paper. The title: Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not: Evidence from the 1918 Flu

Now back in your box, illiterate troll.

rick_chasey

coopster_the_1st said:

rick_chasey said:

Yebbut that’s a joke.

Govt isn’t printing money to pay for it, it’s borrowing like, almost literally, there is no tomorrow.

Would not be surprised if we see a return of inflation and more normal (ie not lower bound) interest rates in the next couple years.

Pross is right to call you out.

They said we would see inflation before the first deployment of QE. I don't expect to see the inflation and interest rates you see because of the almost dead stop the economy is experiencing.

Well the economist is also using the meme as a joke you f@cking idiot.

rick_chasey

Finally, reason to doubt Chinese numbers, exhibit 930:

https://twitter.com/tracyalloway/status/1243412159523999744?s=21

thecycleclinic

What ever we think if you start calling people names then frankly this forum is not for free discussion. The name caller is the troll.

rick_chasey

thecycleclinic said:

What ever we think if you start calling people names then frankly this forum is not for free discussion. The name caller is the troll.

O RLY

pblakeney

thecycleclinic said:

The name caller is the troll.

Good point, well made.

rick_chasey

Oh come on. We have guys here literally losing family members and he’s going “meh, worth it”.

Anwyay, the above posts are relevant so don’t be all English and throw the baby out with the bath water because someone was called a name.

Christ I feel like Larry David half the time.

thecycleclinic

I dont think cooper the 1st has said meh worth it to Poss's loss. Thats your interpretation which I dont think is justified. I have re read the posts I cant interpret his arguement your way. He is making an argument without holding to the view that saving lives now is the most important thing at all costs. That view places lives in the present with up most importance. The view arguement tries to hold not only lives now but quality of life in the future as important as each other.

My dad who is in his 70's and at risk due to his age has said similar to me when we talk daily. Does that make him a dick.

You can sympathise with the loss of someone and hold the view that perhaps our course of action is going to storing up problems for the future which have there own equally harmful effects.

Our whole response is emotional. Time is going to tell if it was worth it or not. One thing I do know is we wont learn any lessons.

Stop calling people names please. If we loose our civility we have nothing left.

rick_chasey

thecycleclinic said:

I dont think cooper the 1st has said meh worth it to Ross's loss. I have re read the post. He is making an argument without emotion.

My dad who is in his 70's and at risk due to his age has said similar to me when we talk daily. Does that make him a censored .

You can sympathise with the loss of someone and hold the view that perhaps our course of action is going to storing up problems for the future which have there own equally harmful effects.

Our whole response is emotional. Time is going to tell if it was worth it or not. One thing I do know is we wont learn any lessons.

Stop calling people names please. If we loose our civility we have nothing left.

I think you need to pay attention to what he calls me on a weekly basis.

Ffs.

Are you thick too?

morstar

Not quite sure why somebody keeps using the term pragmatism but then suggests no pragmatic steps whatsoever.

Here is the pragmatic reality. We can't lock down forever as the virus needs to run its course until a vaccine or cure is found. This is expected to take too long to maintain a total lockdown.

What we are establishing is a valve mechanism where we can control the rate of spread. It was running out of control so drastic measure were taken. Life hasn't stopped, we go shopping and exercising.

The distancing in shops and all businesses will remain for the entire lifecycle until the vaccine is found.

Once we have controlled the rate of spread, more businesses will be re-opened with methods to reduce face to face interactions. We are establishing how much influence these measures have using a control group of essential services.

The virus will continue to spread. There will almost certainly be a cycle of tightening and loosening of lockdowns.

Testing will help focus the lockdowns and controls required.

Immunity will increase as people get through this and gradually normality will return.

It will have cost lives, the economy, families and individuals. There isn't an option that doesn't.

Just bleating on about pragmatism with no practical suggestions won't get us anywhere. Doing nothing is not an option.

Conflating sociopathy with making difficult decisions disrespects those people who are actually making those tough decisions every single day right now. Don't suggest that bleating on an internet forum is anywhere close to what those people are having to consider.

ballysmate

Although Coopster may put it in an unpalatable way, there is some truth in what he says. It is against our nature to allow people to die and not try to save them, but it must be evident to all that people in years to come will die because of lack of resources due to a shrunken economy and the Chancellor's spending today.
Google 'death austerity' and there are no end of bodies claiming austerity to be the cause of upwards of 100,000 deaths.
The austerity of the last decade is nothing to what is to come when hopefully this virus is contained.
We will then await the next one.

My sympathies to Pross on his family's loss and anyone else who has so suffered, but I don't think he will be the last on here to suffer a loss.

thecycleclinic

Ah your calling me names now.

Morstar as I have said we will see if the current approach works as planned and how much normality is restored when the restriction are relaxed. My worry is we wont be able to jump start the economy again easily. Why would a business hire or invest if a shutdown is expected. Cash hoarding is more likely.

However we are were we are and I am going along with it. Thinking about the future should never be a crime.

Sadly your suggesting it is.

I think I am done with this forum now. It's simply not worth expressing one's opinion anymore. We dont live in a society were free exchange of views is valued anymore.

rick_chasey

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

coopster_the_1st

All those who are moral postering right now are really going to b!tch, whinge, bleat and complain when jobs are cut, vital services are reduced and taxes rise to pay back from the damage we are currently doing to our economy.

ballysmate

rick_chasey said:

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

Do you believe that when the virus is contained/eradicated and we try to get back to normal, we will be able to revert to the 2019 levels of spending on health and public services? The economy shrunken, the Chancellor having shaken every leaf off his money tree? The same levels of treatments will be available then as are available now?
Because if you believe that, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

I am not saying what is being spent now is necessarily wrong, just that people need to understand that there will be a long term cost.

rjsterry

coopster_the_1st said:

All those who are moral postering right now are really going to b!tch, whinge, bleat and complain when jobs are cut, vital services are reduced and taxes rise to pay back from the damage we are currently doing to our economy.

What you call moral posturing is just people worrying about the more immediate health risks to themselves and immediate family. You appear to be more relaxed about that, but more worried about the longer term impacts. That's fair enough, but we're all scared and those of us taking a more immediate view aren't dismissing the longer term issues either. Jobs already have been cut. Taxes already have risen in the last budget. It's There is no version of this that doesn't damage the economy.

coopster_the_1st

pblakeney said:

So, what would you do?

Firstly, any modelling that uses any amount of Chinese "data" should go straight in the shredder. Until we do this we will continued to take the wrong approach.

The best option is anyone who is over 70 or is vulnerable due to underlying medical conditions should be in enforced quarantine until a vaccine is found and delivered(estimated 18+ months)

Funnily enough, large numbers of the above high risk group will not value their life enough and not respect these restrictions. Families will quickly break this lockdown as the emotion of not seeing their elders with trump the value of their life. If they and their families treat their lives with such disregard why should we all suffer for them!

We need to ban sensationalist claptrap headlines. Take the Scum today, 1 person dies from C19 every 30 minutes. Well here is the reality, 1 person dies every minute already but we don't throw the whole of UK economic resources at this issue because we see it as part of the standard mortality rate,

If the governement was being serious about the health of the population and preventing deaths it would ban smoking with immedaite effect as roughly 1800 people die each week from smoking diseases. These deaths are accepted as part of the normal mortality. C19 is not overly special, it does similar things to what the flu does each year except with the flu there is a mitigation vaccine to stop many more old and vulnerable dying each year.

rjsterry

ballysmate said:

rick_chasey said:

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

Do you believe that when the virus is contained/eradicated and we try to get back to normal, we will be able to revert to the 2019 levels of spending on health and public services? The economy shrunken, the Chancellor having shaken every leaf off his money tree? The same levels of treatments will be available then as are available now?
Because if you believe that, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

I am not saying what is being spent now is necessarily wrong, just that people need to understand that there will be a long term cost.

I don't think there will be any 'back to normality'. This will cause permanent changes in various aspects of how we live, just as previous pandemics have.

ballysmate

rjsterry said:

ballysmate said:

rick_chasey said:

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

Do you believe that when the virus is contained/eradicated and we try to get back to normal, we will be able to revert to the 2019 levels of spending on health and public services? The economy shrunken, the Chancellor having shaken every leaf off his money tree? The same levels of treatments will be available then as are available now?
Because if you believe that, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

I am not saying what is being spent now is necessarily wrong, just that people need to understand that there will be a long term cost.

I don't think there will be any 'back to normality'. This will cause permanent changes in various aspects of how we live, just as previous pandemics have.

Don't doubt it.

mr_goo

rjsterry said:

ballysmate said:

rick_chasey said:

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

Do you believe that when the virus is contained/eradicated and we try to get back to normal, we will be able to revert to the 2019 levels of spending on health and public services? The economy shrunken, the Chancellor having shaken every leaf off his money tree? The same levels of treatments will be available then as are available now?
Because if you believe that, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

I am not saying what is being spent now is necessarily wrong, just that people need to understand that there will be a long term cost.

I don't think there will be any 'back to normality'. This will cause permanent changes in various aspects of how we live, just as previous pandemics have.

On that I agree. Particularly for me as I'm now out of a job. Certainly has made me reassess things. Family and Health 1st obviously, but working in an already volatile industry is not for me anymore. I shall cut my cloth accordingly and when we are in the new normality I shall go for lower paid job where I can just leave it at 5pm and go home without worrying and stressing.
In meantime I'm gonna see if I can volunteer my services to deliver food and medicine to the over 70s.

rick_chasey

ballysmate said:

rick_chasey said:

Bally - please see the study I posted which explains why what your saying is *wrong* with evidence

Do you believe that when the virus is contained/eradicated and we try to get back to normal, we will be able to revert to the 2019 levels of spending on health and public services? The economy shrunken, the Chancellor having shaken every leaf off his money tree? The same levels of treatments will be available then as are available now?
Because if you believe that, I have a bridge for sale that you may be interested in.

I am not saying what is being spent now is necessarily wrong, just that people need to understand that there will be a long term cost.

The clue is in the title of the study. “Pandemics Depress the Economy, Public Health Interventions Do Not”

I struggle how I can make this any clearer.

rick_chasey

I also don't understand why people are suggesting that I don't understand the economic consequences.

I don't think most people are appreciating *how big* this recession will be. But the solution to that, according to all the evidence, is for gov'ts to intervene harder, faster and longer.

morstar

thecycleclinic said:

Sadly your suggesting it is.

Really, care to elaborate.
I have never hidden from the fact difficult decisions are required.
I’m not hearing pragmatic steps. Just suggestions that equate doing nothing with pragmatism.
They aren’t the same thing.