Making the news today....

[Guest Gimlet]

2 hours ago, trigger_andy said:

It seems the better people are educated the less children they have. 

 

2 hours ago, Mark J said:

How many do you have?

I have none. 

 

Don't think it's down to my (mostly self-) education though.

[Mark J]

5 hours ago, tree-fancier123 said:

and you don't think the current government hasn't been through academia with a fine tooth comb looking for people who can at least partially understand these phenomena. Personally I don't think the advisers they have used either in government, or those in universities could have been any better. Remember all over the world scientists have been at odds over how to manage this.

There are 3 main points

1 - lockdowns clearly slow the spread, the more complete the lockdown the better

2- shutting most of the economy for more than a few weeks may well cause more long term suffering than just letting people die and carrying on, with mass burials of those who don't make it. Putting financial strength and natural selection before compassion (hope they don't do this as I'm asthmatic and not looking forward to atypical pneumonia). The thing is the financial impact of the lockdown will suck wealth from the many to save the few who wouldn't survive the disease. We do this because we are compassionate. 

3 - related to point 2, and very much realating to your point about hiring the best experts is the idea of herd immunity, now this is something nearly all experts agree on, but how to go about it is where they differ. I suppose a vaccine is artifical herd immunity, but it doesn't yet exist.

Look at todays graph from the Uk gov Covid 19 dashboard, the government has listened to the best people and tried very hard to discriminate the relevant information. Chris Witty and his colleagues in the medical schools and universities have served us well - it's looking under control

Sure a total lockdown a month earlier, including sea and land ports would have saved lives, but without significant hospital deaths being reported there would have been low acceptance of infringement of civil liberty and shuttering almost the entire economy.

Just look at those charts - that is success, not failure. I say well done to all. No one alive has had to deal with shit like this before, so don't expect the PM to get every last detail right. Surely even an ex drug user would agree Boris is miles better than Trump? I know even my partially distorted reformed druggie brain can see that Boris is pretty good at this crisis. And in the past I've voted Labour, Green and Conservative. It would have been Conservative again before Christmas, but I had a broken ankle and it was a done deal so I put my feet up and abstained.

Ok then, so if they have the right people, why didn't they follow their advice ie: lockdown 4 weeks before it was instigated, and doing something more useful than telling the over 70's to avoid cruises etc.?

I'd like to know what you think their reasoning is? Why employ experts if you don't act upon their guidance?

Graphs look swanky, I appreciate you've done some research, but the graphs would look much different if the gov had acted in a professional manner.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Mark J

[Mark J]

6 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

And there we have a neat summary of socialist fiscal policy! ?

 

(that was an open door Mark, couldn’t resist!)

It was left open on purpose.
 

[tree-fancier123]

8 minutes ago, Mark J said:

Ok then, so if they have the right people, why didn't they follow their advice ie: lockdown 4 weeks before it was instigated, and doing something more useful than telling the over 70's to avoid cruises etc.?

I'd like to know what you think their reasoning is? Why employ experts if you don't act upon their guidance?

Graphs look swanky, I appreciate you've done some research, but the graphs would look much different if the gov had acted in a professional manner.

I thought I covered your questions in first post - to reiterate

1. any lockdown was going to nearly bankrupt the country  - so the public needed to see significant hospital deaths recorded before they would believe it necessary

2 the graphs weren't included to look swanky - just to show the daily recorded positive tests aren't still climbing, nor is the hospital death rate.

 

Do you honestly think the public would have put up with staying in and complete closure of all air and sea ports, shutting of non essential businesses without seeing a bit of blood in the streets first?

[Mark J]

5 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

 

Do you honestly think the public would have put up with staying in and complete closure of all air and sea ports, shutting of non essential businesses without seeing a bit of blood in the streets first?

Yes. If it was made apparrent that most nannas are going to die as a result of inactivity.

"Take it on the chin"

Who shall we call upon to govern us, now that all the kings are gone...

Edited April 20, 2020 by Mark J

[trigger_andy]

Just now, Mark J said:

Yes.

 

 

What a guy.  You're completely bonkers. Consistent though, I'll give you that. 

[Mark J]

5 minutes ago, trigger_andy said:

 

 

What a guy.  You're completely bonkers. Consistent though, I'll give you that. 

Haha. Bless you and your wee petrochemical socks. That's the nicest thing anyone has said in ages.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Mark J

[Mark J]

28 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

1. any lockdown was going to nearly bankrupt the country  -

[tree-fancier123]

That 1.8 trillion has built up over years of near zero interest rates - this one event, not just the bailouts and handouts, but the lost tax revenue is going to hit the public purse for gawd knows how much. North of half a trillion?

Interest rates cant go lower, so the new thing every crisis is print

Edited April 20, 2020 by tree-fancier123

[donnk]

2 hours ago, tree-fancier123 said:

That 1.8 trillion has built up over years of near zero interest rates - this one event, not just the bailouts and handouts, but the lost tax revenue is going to hit the public purse for gawd knows how much. North of half a trillion?

Interest rates cant go lower, so the new thing every crisis is print

You cant really look at gov debt in the same way as 'normal' debt. For example look at the current loans, grants, free furlough money. What is going to happen to nearly all of that money is that its going to be spent into the economy.

 

The gov isnt doing these mega handouts for joe public they are doing it to prop up UK PLC GDP. If GPD goes down too much then there isnt enough cash lolling about the system to keep up on the debt repayments/Gilts. Who owns most of these gilts. UK Pension funds. 

 

In the old days banks could only lend out what savers deposited. No more. Every time they provide a loan/mortgage they magic up electronic money that did not exist before, subject to a leverage limit set by the bank of England. This is what sunk a lot of them in 08. 

 

This is why the gov is hell bent on pushing as much housing as it can. Every wimpy or persimmon site of 100 houses is £30 million of made up magic money pumped into the economy boosting GDP. 

 

The other side of the con, you take a mortage of £250k over 25 years you pay back a total of £450k at 5%, they bank then uses this £200k profit to buy up gov loans/gilts and to reduce its leverage to allow it to spank the magic moeny tree to create more loans.

 

 

Whoever dreamed up this crooked fucking system was an evil genius. 

 

Fractional-reserve banking - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by donnk