Re: Coronavirus
 

:shrug:

Re: Coronavirus
 

I understand now. He just doesn't want a Tory lockdown, he wants a Labour lockdown.

that's perfectly clear then.

Re: Coronavirus
 

He agrees to a National Lockdown by BoJo, but not a local lockdown, as he doesn’t agree with the explanation given by the Government, and he states that the Government advisor says a National Lickdown is necessary.

Hope this helps...

Re: Coronavirus
 

How can a lickdown stop the virus ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not really, but thanks for trying.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Gtr Manchester has been in special measures since July. The new tier 2 would actually ease one of the things we have had to do. No visitors to our homes ibut we would be now able to meet in our gardens. SO having been in the equivilant to the new tier 2 for 3 months we are in a strong position to say that it won't work. Gtr Manchester has seen its levels rise week after week. to the point when schools and the universities came back on line the figures were spiraling to the highest in the country.

When the equivilant tier 2 didn't work why should we believe that, against medical advise/predictions, tier 3 will do any better to help the NHS. The only thing that will happen is that more companies will have to close becaue there is nothing in place to help them stay open and even more people will become unemployed.

Gtr Manchester is not trying to score any points in the Party War. the Councillors, Mayors and MP come from all Parties.

The people who live in Gtr Manchester are royally pissed off at the attitude of the Goverment who refuse to see that we want a better way to try to bring our figures down when we have already proved that their way will not work. Andy Burnham is not playing party politics he is fighting for his people's survival.

This isn't about us wanting special treatment it's about us wanting a better option. Close everything for 2/3 weeks. Give England a chance to slow down the infection rates, stop making decisions based purely on how much help costs. Oh and mybe claw back some of the money paid out to their mates.

I am not an economist or scientist and I have no political axe to grind. I just live in one of the Gtr Manchester Boroughs and I have had enough.

Re: Coronavirus
 

What we NEED is an effective test and track system. One that is easily available within one's town.:mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

A excellent rationally thought out post jo.:tu:

---------- Post added at 16:49 ---------- Previous post was at 16:48 ----------

+1

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Bank of England has now asked banks to gear up for negative interest rates!!!

---------- Post added at 17:20 ---------- Previous post was at 17:17 ----------

Low interest rates negatively affect those without mortgages etc who have capital saved. If negative interest rates become a reality, it will actually cost people money to have savings!!

These are likely to be older people who are more likely to be Tory voters.

On the plus side, it might make people think it's not worth saving and they will spend it instead, which will help the economy. There again we may see people once again stuffing their savings in cash under their bed.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ah, well, I tried.

I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you... ;)

---------- Post added at 21:26 ---------- Previous post was at 21:25 ----------

Go for it... :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

I can't see anyone taking the risk of shovelling thousands of pounds under the bed to save themselves losing a fraction of one per cent on interest rates - if that was passed on to the savings end of the market.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Over reaction?

https://news.sky.com/video/liverpool...olice-12104755

Re: Coronavirus
 

Fundamentally Old Boy, no Government, anywhere in the world has any sincere intention of ever repaying debts. They intend to find someone else to lend to them at a later date to repay the initial creditor.

Inflation can erode that over time. Similarly so can economic growth (and tax receipts presumably - not in real terms economically but in practice for the budget). The question Governments really ask themselves is can they fund the cost of borrowing - the interest essentially.

Inflation does erode the amount borrowed and Governments continue to throw more debt on top. Why? Because money now is worth more than money when it's due. Will we be ever unable to pay? Not for debt borrowed in pounds sterling, no. Because the Bank of England - the Central Bank - acts as the lender of last resort.

UK GDP 2019: £2.21trn. Interest on Government debt £0.05trn.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Good to see a company making an honest living and being rewarded for it in these difficult times. ;)

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...ended-12105492

Re: Coronavirus
 

Depends on the steroid use in the gym I suppose.

---------- Post added at 21:46 ---------- Previous post was at 21:46 ----------

A success story :confused:

Re: Coronavirus
 

God loves one

In the world of IT, a user interface is very much like a joke, if you have to explain it, it’s not very good.

Same applies here.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In fairness Pierre, you'd argue against any restrictions, against all of the science, in the name of saving an economy that is beyond saving.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A safety deposit box would be a better option if you can still get one for free.

I've since looked into this a little more. If we do go into negative interest rates, some banks have said that their systems cannot implement it and it doesn't look very good either, so they are more likely to recoup the money by increasing bank charges or reintroducing charges for running our current accounts.

Those with mortgages etc would, in effect, start getting paid for their debt. These payments wouldn't be paid to them, but knocked off the mortgage/loan so that they pay back less than they borrowed.

I wonder if the Government has had a word in the ear of the Bank of England to do this in order that they will be able to get rid of some of the debt that they have racked up?

One of the first things Thatcher did in 1979 was to hike up interest rates. There were lots of complaints from individuals & industry; she retorted by saying that high interest rates are good for some people, namely retired people with savings. It must follow then that if this situation is reversed that the losers would be mainly pensioners, many who traditionally vote Tory.

That's one downside to democracy, in order to stay in power Governments sometimes do what the people want instead of what's the sensible or correct thing to do.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So you’ve written off the economy? What’s next then?

In regards to science, there is no science that shows anything other that lockdowns do nothing but delay the spread of the virus, that’s all.

Things are on the up, but still compared to 6 months ago, we’re nowhere near.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/healthcare

It was predicated, and I posted it on here, that there would be no “second wave” on an equal magnitude to the first, but that there would be an initial wave followed by several Ripples.

This is where we are.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You’re overthinking the reality of this.

---------- Post added at 23:39 ---------- Previous post was at 23:32 ----------

Haha okay Pierre, let’s let the world run free as your ripples develop into tsunamis of deaths.

It’s a shame as I was briefly considering your posts credible but just a nudge or two away from what others thought.

I’m not writing off the economy - the fact it is built upon a hollow core of driving people into population centres that people do not need to be in means it will die. Capitalism 101. If you don’t have a product worth selling nobody will buy. City centre offices and the property developers that stand behind them? Ouch.

And if you had read and understood my posts to Old Boy there has never been a better time to borrow to invest in a new economy. You and Mrs. Pierre can keep your biscuit tin economics to yourselves then.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Having spent over 40 years in that world, we all know there are some users who just never "get it"...

You can try to make the system "idiot proof", but unfortunately there’s alway a bigger idiot.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yea, that’s why in safety critical systems, we look at ‘Human Factors’ where you design systems to make the wrong choice impossible or, at worst, difficult to the point where the user has to deliberately circumvent clear and obvious controls.

As soon as you give people a choice of options, there is always the chance of them choosing the wrong one...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ask any SAP Administrator...

Re: Coronavirus
 

Potentially, another politician has put himself above the law - Tony Blair :td:

[ Image removed, wayyyyy to big ]

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think that's wishful thinking seeing as we don't have vaccines for MERS or SARS, both corona viri, after 15-20 years.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's mainly down to how many people are looking for one and why one was or is needed

https://theconversation.com/the-myst...e-other-137583
Mers is different and work is still going for that but has less funding and focus worldwide.

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-12-19...s-saudi-arabia

Also the work that was done for those is helping now

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hi credentials are of the highest. Why would he put his reputation at risk by saying something he doesn't believe in? It wouldn't make sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Farrar

Re: Coronavirus
 

Does he have shares in one of the vaccine companies.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'll leave that research project in your capable hands. But I suspect that journalists may have checked this out already.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Leaked Canadian memo lays out future of world Covid response (allegedly).

https://thecanadianreport.ca/is-this...21-you-decide/

https://cairnsnews.org/2020/10/16/ca...mpression=true

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thank goodness for great sources like these reporting what the MSM elites do not allow us to read. Bravo! :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

They missed out the important bit, where they are implanting explosive tracking microchips into everyone when they give them the vaccine...

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is something called the great reset but this isn't it and never going to happen.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sunday 18th October.
He wrote:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...rnham-19123852

Re: Coronavirus
 

I abandoned a shopping trip to Tesco when I saw the crowds of students milling about outside the entrance.

I went back later and security had dispersed them, but once inside I encountered large groups of them chatting and blocking the aisles.

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Bless their cotton socks.

They've been taught all about their rights but nothing about responsibilities.

Mind you if you'd asked them why they weren't observing social distancing they'd probably say it's because some guy drove up the M1 months ago. :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why would we ? We dont need them.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

A Tory Councillor and Doctor destroys the myths of herd immunity in an article in the right-wing Spectator magazine.

Some snippets

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/...-any-time-soon

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thats nonsense, of course there is a precedent, thats why vaccines work at all.
I'm sure the odd person may get measles twice, but its not common, and you dont see measles epidemics.
Herd immunity does not mean everyone is immune, it means the majority are, enough to stop it spreading widely.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Smallpox has been eradicated by a process of vaccination. In the past, whenever a local outbreak occurred, a team rushed out to vaccinate the locals. As long as those locals remained local, and didn't go far, then the potential for spreading was limited.

The purpose of lockdowns is not connected to herd immunity. With lockdowns, the idea is that the virus runs out of available new hosts and dies out. It doesn't lie dormant for years, lying in wait. Various infectious diseases in the past have disappeared eg Spanish Flu. How did that happen?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Except you do get them. Where vaccination rates have dropped or are generally low.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-he...-idUKKBN25L22T
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-50625680
Wales measles epidemic: Case numbers up to 588 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22037270

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles...019.00098/full

Re: Coronavirus
 

I suspect that the way measles and other diseases are still with us is because of the cult of antivaccers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Agreed! For diseases like measles, the 'R' value is so high (12-18 compared with 2-6 for COVID-19) that you need very high vaccination rates. As soon as that drops, boom, the disease comes back.

The UK lost its 'measles free' status last year

Re: Coronavirus
 

They don’t; their children do.

MMR is 99% effective, which means one in every 100 people is relying on herd immunity to be protected against measles and the others, because the vaccine didn’t protect them directly. If a further 10 people per 100 haven’t been vaccinated, then with an R rate as high as 12-18, measles will find its way to all of those who weren’t vaccinated and also those for whom the vaccine didn’t work, fairly easily.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wales in LOCKDOWN: 'Stay home' order issued as shops to shut in COVID-19 circuit breaker

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13...irus-latest-vn

Re: Coronavirus
 

The scary thing is that I think we're now onto the second generation for the major 'anti-vax' movement, as it's been 22 years since the discredited paper on MMR was first published.

So we now have both adults and children at risk of catching and spreading diseases for which we have safe and effective vaccines.

If the same behaviour and views hold true for any Covid-19 vaccine or vaccines then I don't know how we get out of this successfully.

Re: Coronavirus
 

we get out by getting on.

Not everybody needs to be vaccinated only at risk groups and the vulnerable. Only 15m are vaccinated against Flu, and for the vast, vast, vast, majority of the population the virus is no more dangerous.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's interesting, where are you getting that from? The ONS figures seem to refute that statement. See section 4 here - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...nd31august2020

At any age, the mortality due to COVID is higher than influenza according to those numbers. Under 65s have a 4x higher risk of dying of COVID than influenza or pneumonia. The risk of course is low so 4x not much still isn't much

Re: Coronavirus
 

Tuberculosis vaccination stopped in the UK as case numbers were low. Now the numbers are rising in some areas.

Re: Coronavirus
 

COVID-19 has a tendency to decimate the lungs, in a way "regular" flu doesn't.

Link

From June
These cases tend to be "high risk", ie overweight and/or smokers, rather than the vulnerable category. That is a much bigger group to be shielded.

---------- Post added at 17:36 ---------- Previous post was at 17:35 ----------

Because it's brought in from overseas from populations that were never vaccinated.

Re: Coronavirus
 

You've answered your own question. Looking at pure statistics can give a skewed view. 4x bugger all is still bugger all.

I read that report and I couldn't really work out what it saying. This other FoI statement from the ONS for 1 month only advises that 90% of victims had underlying pre-conditions.

Anyway, the point was, going back to the original issue was that the whole population will not need to be vaccinated only the vulnerable and at risk groups, same as for flu.

---------- Post added at 19:22 ---------- Previous post was at 18:24 ----------

Unfortunately, I think what we are seeing now is Leaders (Wales) trying to out do each other. Ooh look how good a leader I am going to shut the country down, when the number of people on ventilators hasn’t changed for, over 3 weeks it has fluctuated between 26 - 34.

Also what we’re going to see is even more over-dramatising Of the situation as the politicians and science experts try Not to look foolish for over-reacting.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ah, fair enough, if you get the Excel data linked in the report, this is the death rate of COVID vs. the 5 year average for influenza per 100,000

Under 65 3.6x
65-69 4.1x
70-74 3.8x
75-79 3.6x
80-84 3x
85+ 1.7x

I picked the 5 year average as 2020 is quite a mild influenza year. This does suggest that COVID is deadlier than flu.

'Bugger all' might be a bit of a stretch for under 65s. A death rate of 16.4 per 100,000 is 5093 deaths. That is 5093 individual tragedies.

I do agree with your point though - the most vulnerable should definitely be the first ones to get the vaccine alongside health and care workers to prevent spread the the vulnerable who have not yet had the vaccine or the vaccine didn't take.

Hopefully any vaccine will be effective. If the rates of acquired immunity are low, more people will need to vaccinated eventually to get a herd protection

Re: Coronavirus
 

Any figures will be "skewed" by the lockdown and other precautions being taken. That will obviously have reduced any illness and mortality figures, compared to people carrying on as normal.
You just have to look at the number of instances from around the World, where gatherings have resulted in deaths, that in normal times would've just made them sick with regular flu.
If it was the same as regular flu, then it would've gone unnoticed and hospitals wouldn't be filling up fast.:rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

A round of applause from me for this one.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Once you've had it we'll know won't we.

Re: Coronavirus
 

One for the next PMQs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54605222

Re: Coronavirus
 

Advice isn't law


There is an exemption for chauffeur-driven cars, but Downing Street said it had advised all its ministers to wear coverings.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So flu goes unnoticed.................ohhh okay!

You Mean like this? 2008

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...s-Britain.html

Or as predicted in 2018?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...eason-history/

Or like it did in 2016?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/n...test-8pnmdpdfx

Or as advised in 2014?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...d-flu-pandemic


Yep, hardly noticeable.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Ooh what a thing to say,do you have a few hundred examples ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

From your first link.
From a few weeks ago.

Thousandfold number of deaths. Now that's noticeable.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Another lawbreaker ?

Gary Lineker hypocrisy: BBC star flouts COVID rules as he shops in M&S without face mask

The outspoken former footballer was pictured wandering around Marks & Spencer in Barnes, south-west London, on Sunday without a mask - after months of lecturing others to do just that.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/13...-face-covering

Re: Coronavirus
 

No one's claiming it's unlawful - my quote confirms this. Sub-optimal at the least.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Oh, look - here’s the Telegraph, the Daily Mail, and the Daily Express smearing the Government...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-covered.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...s-latest-no-10

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...er-government/

Bunch of lefties...

Re: Coronavirus
 

I wasn’t aware we lived in France.

You stated/implied that the flu goes by “unnoticed” in the UK. I simply proved that wasn’t the case. No more, no less - you may move on.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That’s neither what Nomadking or I said.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sorry, I may have mis-understood

Nomad said, which you subsequently cheerleaded

Which certainly says to me that regular flu, does go unnoticed and doesn’t fill up hospitals. You explain to me How that statement doesn’t say that...........

Re: Coronavirus
 

He said if it was the same as regular flu it’d have gone unnoticed. Which, to any reasonable person, is to say that there would have been similar numbers to and impacts on healthcare provision as seasonal flu.

Everyone knows seasonal flu happens and it has some impact on healthcare provision. Indeed, capacity is to a greater or lesser extent built around winter flu season. If it was just a seasonal flu it’d have had a routine impact. “Unnoticed” I took to clearly mean for the average observer considering the ordinary impacts of these things on their day to day lives. I’m not sure the people in Wuhan “didn’t notice” the impact or Coronavirus. Or those in Northern Italy.

I’m not sure digging up scaremongering stories from tabloids overstating season flu is equivalent to Coronavirus. Indeed, the Daily Mail assures me each year that it will be the coldest winter on record, with the warmest heatwaves ever, the odd hurricane and 8 feet of snowfall each year. I’d not use them as a barometer.

---------- Post added at 22:16 ---------- Previous post was at 22:12 ----------

Ah, British exceptionalism is back! I’ve missed this theme in the coronavirus thread... we’re different because...

It turns out we don’t have a better healthcare system than China. Multi-generational households.

The floor is yours Pierre.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've no problem in tackling apparent contradictions as I did by posting the Tony Blair story on Sunday, the Nick Hancock story today and by condemning Margaret Ferrier.

You subscribe to the view that if they're Conservative they're exempt from such criticism. Sorry, I will continue to call such politicians out, regardless of their political party.

Re: Coronavirus
 

In Andrew’s defence I’m not sure it takes that long with this Government. They seem to have a conveyor belt of useful stories coming out on a regular basis.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There is much irony in that sentence, if only you could see it.

You’ve gone off on one again and totally missed it. Don’t drink on a Monday night.

That was said because we were talking about the U.K. and the NHS, and he referenced France. Which was irrelevant to the discussion......nothing more.

Re: Coronavirus
 

To believe what we are seeing elsewhere won’t happen here is naive in the extreme unless we are doing something fundamentally different.

That means our test, trace, isolate has to be better, our healthcare system has to have more capacity and better treatments or we have greater restrictions that are being strictly adhered to.

I’m not seeing any evidence of these things. Cases steadily rising, hospital cases steadily rising, deaths steadily rising. The trajectory is inevitable.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Bit of a wild thought, I know. But amuse me. Have you thought that with the press of all hues (;)) reporting the issue, it may just possibly be you who is being less than objective?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Lots to unpack here!

They’re not “Steadily rising”,....they’re going through the roof from around 450 per day in July to around 16,000 per day now. A huge increase, totally eclipsing the initial round.

This is were it gets more interesting...are we talking hospital admissions? Because this were somebody has gone to hospital for any reason, but tested positive, tests positive whilst in hospital for other reasons etc.

Even so, I agree there is an increase, but it in no way correlates to the infection metric.
Not even close to April. The curve is a magnitude flatter.

Not really, they have risen, and gone back down again, again the death curve is even flatter and the correlation between the infection rate and the death rates, in any other setting you would struggle to assign a high level of risk to it.

It currently has a mortality rate of 0.5%, which is obviously higher than the true figure as the majority of people either don’t get tested or don’t even know they have/had it.

But at 0.5% it’s as deadly as none of the attached.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...and-month.html

Re: Coronavirus
 

Will that be the hundreds of thousands of deaths that you predicted?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I think you will find that is my prediction without any mitigation at all. I’m sure you’ll agree - there’s very much a lot mitigation going on. And more to come. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, here's hoping, jfman. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

#363 suggested otherwise.
But I'm happy to take you at your word.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Apples and oranges of course, as we weren’t testing in the initial round.

Probably all of them - I fail to see the relevance. The NHS has finite capacity and resource.

I’m not sure what your point is. 0.5% of reaching herd immunity is an acceptable death toll but 1% isn’t?

Those conditions also aren’t all contagious :D

---------- Post added 20-10-2020 at 00:00 ---------- Previous post was 19-10-2020 at 23:54 ----------

We are of course also getting better at treatments which is a factor in improving the death rate significantly. Another important outcome of the delay towards a vaccine strategy.

Although in part that depends on staying inside the resource capacity of the NHS.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m just as bad as the Torygraph, Daily Fail, and the Daily Excess?

OK, then... :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

We're just going to have to live with it like seasonal flu and stop the damaging lockdowns that are and will kill more as collateral damage (Untreated cancer, heart disease, mental health etc) in the coming years than are dying from COVID 19.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But it’s not like seasonal flu - it kills more, and it could have longer lasting ongoing health issues.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I remember the health experts shouting and crying that smoking & drinking was a naughty thing to be doing - and a bad influence on children who saw their parents indulge.

Now they've successfully banned smoking virtually everywhere, and killed off the pub trade, I wonder what they think of the new scenario where everyone that does smoke & drink are doing so at home in front of their kids?

*fills glass, lights ciggy, goes back to staring out of the window*

:tiptoe:

Re: Coronavirus
 

If parents are smoking in the house with their children then health experts probably aren't happy but there isn't much they do can about it. Short of banning it all together then the reasonability lies with the parents surely?

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/our...ker-lockdowns/

Economists for circuit breakers.

Re: Coronavirus
 

opinions are like bum holes


everyone has one;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

but will it? when we have a vaccine and the vulnerable are vaccinated?

Because it's a novel virus there is by definition no immunity (ignoring the T-Cell theory for a moment)

How many might seasonal flu kill if there was no immunity and 15-20M weren't vaccinated annually?

---------- Post added at 12:25 ---------- Previous post was at 12:23 ----------

Oh there's lot's they can do! they could legislate that smoking in a confined space with children is illegal and abusive to children. Like they have done with cars!

Then the police will come a knocking when someone makes a complaint against you.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A straw man comparison if ever I saw one.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Left wing economists from the university of Viv Nicholson.

Let's shut it down, then start it up, then shut it down, then......repeat ad-infinitum

Re: Coronavirus
 

We don't know I don't think.

I know what you're saying, that this is a new virus entirely and even/when it evolves it'll become like the flu in that our experiences of dealing with the previous version of the virus will allow our immune systems to adapt to it's evolved strains quicker.

But I don't think they know that for sure yet nor the long term ramifications of the virus. The reports of 'long COVID' and people having evidence of damage from it even if they were asymptomatic are not fully understood yet.

Either way it's going to be around forever it seems but the question is if it's better for all of us that first exposure is done via a vaccine rather than contracting the virus proper.

Even if we do give up and try a controlled spread as opposed to halting the virus then that'll likely involve trying to keep it very low over the winter months and opening up in spring again to avoid the flu season.

There are still so many unknowns I don't think you can fault the government for taking the cautious approach.

Re: Coronavirus
 

"No limit" shouldn't mean a free for all. You still have to be selective about what you spend money on.

Re: Coronavirus
 

no it isn't, it's perfectly sensible coherent argument.

Comparing the death rates of two viruses. One that we have a vaccine for and one that we don't - now that's nonsensical.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There's no outcome that doesn't cause economic harm. You either choose to mitigate it or do not under the guise of it being too expensive. Yet there's no plan to pay the current £2trn of debt anyway!

---------- Post added at 13:00 ---------- Previous post was at 12:58 ----------

Hmmm. I suppose it's an interesting thought experiment. However I fail to see how useful such a comparison is. In the real world we do have a flu vaccine.

Nobody would ever countenance not distributing a flu vaccine. It's generally accepted in the civilised world we try to improve treatment outcomes.

---------- Post added at 13:02 ---------- Previous post was at 13:00 ----------

Quality infrastructure projects. You either pay for that our pay out on dole money anyway and have nothing to show for it. The private sector isn't coming to the rescue any time soon.

Re: Coronavirus
 

thank the lord the pandemic is over.

I mean it's no longer a public health issue, just a financial settlement issue.