Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
What do you suggest?
|
In my view, we need to get people back to work and re-open the schools. The people who need protecting are those registered as vulnerable, although frankly how we manage that is not as easy as it sounds. Visitors have been banned from care homes and good protective measures introduced, but the virus has still got in and the number of deaths is high.
I know some of you don't accept this, but the virus will run its course, no matter what we do. Slowing it down is all we can hope to achieve.
The measures to date have worked in that we have avoided the peak that was predicted if we did nothing, but the number of new cases will start rising again when the lockdown finishes. Unless, of course, our summer season finishes it off, but the jury is still out on that.
While I hope that we do find an inoculation that works and we can get it out there this autumn, the problem is that nobody is yet certain that this can be done, and if it cannot, it will be a long time before it becomes available, by which time, the virus will have burned itself out (provided it doesn't mutate, in which case any inoculation will be worthless against it).
In the end, it is herd immunity that will stop the virus and waiting for the cure to achieve that is hopeless, I'm afraid. It will simply come too late. I completely understand that people are reluctant to face this, but that is the naked truth of the matter.
---------- Post added at 11:54 ---------- Previous post was at 11:47 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
We are in a global pandemic Old Boy - of course everything isn't okay. However, what you are advocating is to ignore a worldwide health crisis and pretend everything is normal. I've stated over and over again - death does very little for consumer confidence, increased rates of sick leave and self isolation leave much of the economy not viable anyway.
You warn, almost gleefully, of the dangerous second wave coming for other countries yet ignore the fact we are at precarious risk of it here.
There's plenty of economic theories that demonstrate state intervention can kickstart economies following a slump. We made our way out the Great Depression with Keynesian economics and similarly could do so again.
I understand it goes against your views ideologically, fundamentally essentially it demonstrates market failure and relies upon state intervention, however that's never been a valid reason to not do anything.
|
I am not ignoring the crisis, nor am I 'gleeful' about any resurgence after initially getting it under control. Stop trying to hype everything up out of all proportion, you do yourself no favours.
What I have drawn attention to is the sheer futility of continuing the lockdown indefinitely. I know that you and some others want the government to be seen to be doing something, even though it won't work, but I think we should be looking at the economic devastation this lockdown will produce and consider whether it was worth it in the end, given that we can only slow it down, but not stop it.
I think you greatly underestimate the long-term financial consequences of what you propose.