Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pelosi says Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 caused “unnecessa

SystemSystem Posts: 11,683
edited April 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Pelosi says Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 caused “unnecessary deaths”. Could the same be said of Team Johnson?

Nancy Pelosi has made public a letter she’s sent to her Congress colleagues in which she charged Trump with missteps in handling the coronavirus pandemic that “caused unnecessary death and economic disaster” in the US. That’s a big accusation given how close we are to WH2020.

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    edited April 2020
    I see another bad day for Sweden

    oh, first :blush:
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    edited April 2020
    first - just to annoy firsters.

    ah well second - not so much fun there
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Omnium said:

    first - just to annoy firsters.

    Waves .....
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,007
    The biggest mistake the UK and US governments made was not following South Korea and Germany in mass testing early enough.

    The verdict is still not clear on lockdown, especially if Sweden avoids having the most deaths per head in Europe and still has not lockeddown
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    Floater said:

    Omnium said:

    first - just to annoy firsters.

    Waves .....
    That cruise ship which I missed...
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited April 2020
    Omnium said:

    first - just to annoy firsters.

    ah well second - not so much fun there

    I'm sorry I am late, I was firsting Norman Lamont.
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    The UK doesn't have the 2nd highest number of deaths in the world. Next.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    IshmaelZ said:

    Omnium said:

    first - just to annoy firsters.

    ah well second - not so much fun there

    I'm sorry I am later, I was firsting Norman Lamont.
    There are matters that shouldn't be posted.
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    Moreover, the number of new infection was already falling before lockdown started, so the idea we were far too late seems to be rather short of actual data.

    If you want a near neighbour of Germany and Denmark to slag off, why not start with Belgium which is the worst hit location in the world.
  • Options
    I wished you wouldn`t just focus on Germany. The UK has done as well as France, better than Spain and Italy. How about Sweden that didn`t even have a lockdown. Smithson and others always pick the best case (in any measure - PPE, testing etc) and compare the UK to that. Nothing said about how we haven`t run out of rooms, ventilators, the great speed at building new facilities. Mistakes have been made by all Governments and the WHO. Stop nitpicking.
    Also Johnson never said it was a hoax, he initiated a lockdown, which if started in February would have not been accepted by people.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    IshmaelZ said:

    Omnium said:

    first - just to annoy firsters.

    ah well second - not so much fun there

    I'm sorry I am late, I was firsting Norman Lamont.
    LOL, not heard that one for ages. The joke that got Julian Clary effectively banned from TV for more than a decade.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    mike9978h said:

    I wished you wouldn`t just focus on Germany. The UK has done as well as France, better than Spain and Italy. How about Sweden that didn`t even have a lockdown. Smithson and others always pick the best case (in any measure - PPE, testing etc) and compare the UK to that. Nothing said about how we haven`t run out of rooms, ventilators, the great speed at building new facilities. Mistakes have been made by all Governments and the WHO. Stop nitpicking.
    Also Johnson never said it was a hoax, he initiated a lockdown, which if started in February would have not been accepted by people.

    The mistakes that could have been made and haven't been won't feature. We all know the government has done some things quite well.

    Welcom to PB @mike9978h
  • Options
    jos_sjos_s Posts: 2
    The UK has the 5th highest number of deaths and 9th by population size at the moment. It's too early to tell what the final tallies will be, but I suspect the political argument will also involve which Countries have most successfully protected their economies as well.
  • Options
    I notice the Smithson and the Guardian very rarely post anything positive about the Governments response. How about comparing our world leading employee/small business support with other countries? This isn`t done because the UK actually did well in that measure. Some areas we do well in, others we don't. To keep making political point scoring which the new shadow cabinet is trying to do is just unnecessary.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    edited April 2020
    Can I be first to argue that the UK health system should be much more like Germany's?

    Everyone opposed to the government’s response should agree. ;)

    https://www.businessinsider.nl/germany-why-coronavirus-death-rate-lower-italy-spain-test-healthcare-2020-3?international=true&r=US
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,405
    Not acting like Donald Trump has undoubtedly helped the UK.

    This is not a high bar.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2020
    Sandpit said:
    We already see the likes of the Guardian losing their shit over suggestions of use of personal data to tackle this problem. Which is exactly what is needed to follow the South Korean model.

    And we know that in Germany, the PCR test was produced by the private sector and a lot of the labs that normally do testing for the health system (and are crucial to why Germany has massive capacity) are also private. I have a feeling the likes of the Guardian won't be too happy for us to copy that model either.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    Sandpit said:

    Can I be first to argue that the UK health system should be much more like Germany's?

    Everyone opposed to the government’s response should agree. ;)

    https://www.businessinsider.nl/germany-why-coronavirus-death-rate-lower-italy-spain-test-healthcare-2020-3?international=true&r=US

    Yes, the opportunity to be the first is open to all. Whether you are in fact the first to argue this isn't clear.
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    Sandpit said:

    Can I be first to argue that the UK health system should be much more like Germany's?

    Everyone opposed to the government’s response should agree. ;)

    https://www.businessinsider.nl/germany-why-coronavirus-death-rate-lower-italy-spain-test-healthcare-2020-3?international=true&r=US

    Well quite. It's getting increasingly ridiculous watching the collective response of 1. The NHS is wonderful and everyone in it is a saint. 2. Our outcome's are worse than everyone else's.

    Neither is true, but the fact so many seem to believe both together is rather odd.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2020
    Official score on the doors. Testing numbers still not exceeding 20,000....Hancock is in for an almighty shit storm when it doesn't get even close to 100,000 in 2 weeks time.

    https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1250782047095922690?s=20
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897

    Sandpit said:
    We already see the likes of the Guardian losing their shit over suggestions of use of personal data to tackle this problem. Which is exactly what is needed to follow the South Korean model.

    And we know that in Germany, the PCR test was produced by the private sector and a lot of the labs that normally do testing for the health system (and are crucial to why Germany has massive capacity) are also private. I have a feeling the likes of the Guardian won't be too happy for us to copy that model either.
    "How your phone is turning into your ankle bracelet"
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5OAjnveyJo
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    Omnium said:

    Sandpit said:

    Can I be first to argue that the UK health system should be much more like Germany's?

    Everyone opposed to the government’s response should agree. ;)

    https://www.businessinsider.nl/germany-why-coronavirus-death-rate-lower-italy-spain-test-healthcare-2020-3?international=true&r=US

    Yes, the opportunity to be the first is open to all. Whether you are in fact the first to argue this isn't clear.
    First on this thread to argue it!

    Anyway, have to head off. Today is wedding anniversary, so a nice dinner to prepare and plenty of wine to drink!
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2020
    So I think I can guess the questions for the presser at 5pm.

    Deaths up, why isn't the lockdown working?
    How many people have you killed by not locking down earlier?
    Not enough tests, why?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?
  • Options
    Omnium said:

    mike9978h said:

    I wished you wouldn`t just focus on Germany. The UK has done as well as France, better than Spain and Italy. How about Sweden that didn`t even have a lockdown. Smithson and others always pick the best case (in any measure - PPE, testing etc) and compare the UK to that. Nothing said about how we haven`t run out of rooms, ventilators, the great speed at building new facilities. Mistakes have been made by all Governments and the WHO. Stop nitpicking.
    Also Johnson never said it was a hoax, he initiated a lockdown, which if started in February would have not been accepted by people.

    The mistakes that could have been made and haven't been won't feature. We all know the government has done some things quite well.

    Welcom to PB @mike9978h
    Thanks for the welcome. It is true that the things that have been done well are not acknowledged by Mike and others. It would be nice if he and the Guardian types just paused for a minute to acknowledge that. The Guardian called for a lockdown (quicker to call for than to actually draw up and implement) but then complains about domestic violence, kids missing school meals etc - well it was known if you have a lockdown the first couple of weeks is OK but then people get antsy. So you need public support, of which there was not in February.
  • Options

    So I think I can guess the questions for the presser at 5pm.

    Deaths up, why isn't the lockdown working?
    How many people have you killed by not locking down earlier?
    Not enough tests, why?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?
    When is lock down ending?

    Exactly - journalists seem to just go around in packs. An exit plan is obviously being worked on, but it takes more than the 5 minutes it takes to just call for one. It is also clear that the focus in on making the lockdown continue with a high degree of compliance so we get over the peak and a sustainable drop. Journalists should stop repeatedly asking stupid questions.
  • Options
    StockyStocky Posts: 9,718
    jos_s said:

    The UK has the 5th highest number of deaths and 9th by population size at the moment. It's too early to tell what the final tallies will be, but I suspect the political argument will also involve which Countries have most successfully protected their economies as well.

    I hope that you are right.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
  • Options

    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?

    Good question, I don`t think there is. So those who want to compare (and explicitly hope the UK does worse due to political reasons) need to factor that in.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,639
    edited April 2020
    "Google pressured by Brussels over privacy in coronavirus tracing apps

    Search group urged to respect EU laws as it joins forces with Apple in response to pandemic" (£ or via Google search)

    https://www.ft.com/content/f705b090-7c91-49eb-8d00-490da4c6a017
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897

    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?

    Nope.

    In my mind the best stats are for total deaths, against previous years and adjusted for population. We can predict what the death rate would have been in a 'normal' year and see the 'excess deaths'. As with most stats, it's not perfect - there will have been a reduction in traffic and industrial accidents causing death, and those arising from complications from surgery. But it's probably the best statistic we have.

    Deaths generally don't go unrecorded for more than a day or two, whereas determination of cause of death varies across jurisdictions and even between hospitals.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Official score on the doors. Testing numbers still not exceeding 20,000....Hancock is in for an almighty shit storm when it doesn't get even close to 100,000 in 2 weeks time.

    https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1250782047095922690?s=20

    Although capacity is supposedly already at 35,000.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    edited April 2020
    Trump has managed to make this political in the US by behaving like an irresponsible idiot with the concentration span of an ADHD toddler (because that is exactly what he is). In contrast I don't think that the government here is politicising this and I don't think people see it that way, despite Mike's best efforts.

    The scientists have been used as human shields, the Chancellor has been bold and imaginative, Boris has genuinely suffered, there is really no doubt that everyone is doing their best. Does that mean everything has gone or is going right? Of course not. But right now normal politics is pretty much stopped and those whinging from the side lines are probably doing themselves more harm than good.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Sandpit said:

    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?

    Nope.

    In my mind the best stats are for total deaths, against previous years and adjusted for population. We can predict what the death rate would have been in a 'normal' year and see the 'excess deaths'. As with most stats, it's not perfect - there will have been a reduction in traffic and industrial accidents causing death, and those arising from complications from surgery. But it's probably the best statistic we have.

    Deaths generally don't go unrecorded for more than a day or two, whereas determination of cause of death varies across jurisdictions and even between hospitals.
    I cannot believe anybody remotely sane can argue we should let this stat determine how badly we destroy our economy for decades to come.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    edited April 2020

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    You think crunching the numbers doesn't matter? Not even for the case you are pretending to make about lives vs economy? What else do you think we should be guided by?
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    DavidL said:

    Trump has managed to make this political in the US by behaving like an irresponsible idiot with the concentration span of an ADHD toddler (because that is exactly what he is). In contrast I don't think that the government here is politicising this and I don't think people see it that way, despite Mike's best efforts.

    The scientists have been used as human shields, the Chancellor has been bold and imaginative, Boris has genuinely suffered, there is really no doubt that everyone is doing their best. Does that mean everything has gone or is going right? Of course not. But right now normal politics is pretty much stopped and those whinging from the side lines are probably doing themselves more harm than good.

    Im sure when the gargantuan bills start to pile in your average taxpayer won't be using the terms 'bold' and 'imaginative to describe Sunak. Nor the millions who are set to lose their jobs with little prospect of re-employment.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250695060766720000?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250697711944454144?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250700351763894272?s=20

    Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.

    They're all wrong and we're right?

    But that really isn't the choice, is it ?
    We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
    I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
    New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
    The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
    Why do people (Other than repatriation) need to fly here during a lockdown ?
    Fruit pickers?
    Why? There are masses of people furloughed. A special dispensation to pick fruit for extra money could be very attractive. 'land army' etc.
    We are literally flying in fruit pickers right now

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/romanian-fruit-pickers-flown-uk-crisis-farming-sector-coronavirus
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250695060766720000?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250697711944454144?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250700351763894272?s=20

    Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.

    They're all wrong and we're right?

    But that really isn't the choice, is it ?
    We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
    I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
    New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
    The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
    Why do people (Other than repatriation) need to fly here during a lockdown ?
    Fruit pickers?
    Why? There are masses of people furloughed. A special dispensation to pick fruit for extra money could be very attractive. 'land army' etc.
    We are literally flying in fruit pickers right now

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/romanian-fruit-pickers-flown-uk-crisis-farming-sector-coronavirus
    It turns out that not even mass unemployment following a pandemic can induce Brits to pick fruit.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897

    Sandpit said:

    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?

    Nope.

    In my mind the best stats are for total deaths, against previous years and adjusted for population. We can predict what the death rate would have been in a 'normal' year and see the 'excess deaths'. As with most stats, it's not perfect - there will have been a reduction in traffic and industrial accidents causing death, and those arising from complications from surgery. But it's probably the best statistic we have.

    Deaths generally don't go unrecorded for more than a day or two, whereas determination of cause of death varies across jurisdictions and even between hospitals.
    I cannot believe anybody remotely sane can argue we should let this stat determine how badly we destroy our economy for decades to come.
    I take it you don't have parents in their seventies with underlying health conditions, who have a very high chance of succumbing to this virus should they catch it?
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    IshmaelZ said:

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    You think crunching the numbers doesn't matter? Not even for the case you are pretending to make about lives vs economy? What else do you think we should be guided by?
    The deaths numbers being 'crunched are completely unreliable, because as just been proved there is no set definition of a corona death.

    And how many more times. This isn;t lives v economy its lives versus lives. The lives the worst recession in a century are bound to take.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    Mr Urquhart,

    I'm beginning to enjoy the journalist's questions. Their stupidity knows no bounds. It's like watching pantomime characters, each vying to be sillier than the one before. Peston is my favourite at the moment. Nothing like a bit of knockabout comedy.

    Even funnier is that they take themselves seriously.
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    What are you on about? He's arguing for the same relaxation the account you're posting from has been aggressively pushing.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    On topic, the government’s paramount priority remains Brexit purity. If some people die in a pandemic as a result, that’s a regrettable necessity for them.
  • Options
    BannedinnParisBannedinnParis Posts: 1,884
    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250695060766720000?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250697711944454144?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250700351763894272?s=20

    Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.

    They're all wrong and we're right?

    But that really isn't the choice, is it ?
    We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
    I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
    New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
    The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
    Why do people (Other than repatriation) need to fly here during a lockdown ?
    Fruit pickers?
    Why? There are masses of people furloughed. A special dispensation to pick fruit for extra money could be very attractive. 'land army' etc.
    We are literally flying in fruit pickers right now

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/romanian-fruit-pickers-flown-uk-crisis-farming-sector-coronavirus
    ironically I have a Romanian friend, based in the UK, who wants to pick fruit - or similar but, so far, has been unable to find anyone willing to employ her.
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Deaths is surely a completely misleading stat because different countries may have different definitions of what a 'Corona death' is.

    Indeed, Doctors themselves may differ.

    Is there an international 'Corona death' standard to which all countries comply?

    Nope.

    In my mind the best stats are for total deaths, against previous years and adjusted for population. We can predict what the death rate would have been in a 'normal' year and see the 'excess deaths'. As with most stats, it's not perfect - there will have been a reduction in traffic and industrial accidents causing death, and those arising from complications from surgery. But it's probably the best statistic we have.

    Deaths generally don't go unrecorded for more than a day or two, whereas determination of cause of death varies across jurisdictions and even between hospitals.
    I cannot believe anybody remotely sane can argue we should let this stat determine how badly we destroy our economy for decades to come.
    I take it you don't have parents in their seventies with underlying health conditions, who have a very high chance of succumbing to this virus should they catch it?
    As you are making it personal my father is 87 with health issues and Corona would I guess bring the curtain down if he got it.

    But its surely possible to quarantine older folk whilst at the same time keeping the wheels of commerce turning.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited April 2020
    Restrictions to tackle the spread of the coronavirus in Switzerland will be gradually relaxed from April 27.

    On Thursday, the government said hospitals would be allowed to perform all procedures, including elective surgeries, while hair salons and massage parlours will be allowed to reopen.

    Primary schools, shops and markets will reopen on May 11, while secondary schools, vocational schools and universities will reopen on June 8.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nigelb said:

    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250695060766720000?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250697711944454144?s=20
    https://twitter.com/AlexInAir/status/1250700351763894272?s=20

    Of course many countries have simply banned arrivals from Britain, except for their own nationals.

    They're all wrong and we're right?

    But that really isn't the choice, is it ?
    We're talking about a complete absence of any kind of screening. Asking if we should ban all arrivals isn't an answer to that.
    I think the answer is that it doesn't work. Screening by temperature misses the asymptomatic and those with mild symptoms, and catches a lot of other people. No other country is currently much worse than us so it doesn't really matter. And to do it properly the Government would have to rent hotels and quarantine everyone for 14 days under house arrest,
    New Zealand managed it. If people genuinely, really genuinely need to fly they'll accept quarantine on each end.
    The difference being that the number of visitors who genuinely, really genuinely, need to fly to New Zealand is statistically zero.
    Why do people (Other than repatriation) need to fly here during a lockdown ?
    Fruit pickers?
    Why? There are masses of people furloughed. A special dispensation to pick fruit for extra money could be very attractive. 'land army' etc.
    We are literally flying in fruit pickers right now

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/romanian-fruit-pickers-flown-uk-crisis-farming-sector-coronavirus
    ironically I have a Romanian friend, based in the UK, who wants to pick fruit - or similar but, so far, has been unable to find anyone willing to employ her.
    I presume the fruit growers will be wanting to work with the labourer suppliers they are familiar with.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,311
    Per capita, UK deaths creep above 200 per million.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited April 2020
    Scott_xP said:
    The Con line of "SNP obsessed about constitutional matters" is taking a bit of a repeated hammer blow at the moment.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613
    Alistair said:

    Scott_xP said:
    The Con line of "SNP obsessed about constitutional matters" is taking a bit of a repeated hammer blow at the moment.
    LOL.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306

    DavidL said:

    Trump has managed to make this political in the US by behaving like an irresponsible idiot with the concentration span of an ADHD toddler (because that is exactly what he is). In contrast I don't think that the government here is politicising this and I don't think people see it that way, despite Mike's best efforts.

    The scientists have been used as human shields, the Chancellor has been bold and imaginative, Boris has genuinely suffered, there is really no doubt that everyone is doing their best. Does that mean everything has gone or is going right? Of course not. But right now normal politics is pretty much stopped and those whinging from the side lines are probably doing themselves more harm than good.

    Im sure when the gargantuan bills start to pile in your average taxpayer won't be using the terms 'bold' and 'imaginative to describe Sunak. Nor the millions who are set to lose their jobs with little prospect of re-employment.
    The bills are going to get paid with newly printed money. That is not a policy without risk but there is no alternative. Sunak's plans will save several million jobs and allow many businesses to survive this that would not have done. That does not mean that a couple of million jobs won't be lost, that hundreds of thousands of small businesses (and some larger ones) will not fail; they will. The economy will be different. This will create new job opportunities as well as costing old ones.

    The shape of this is reasonably clear even if the detail isn't.
    Travel is going to be vastly reduced, especially international travel.
    Nearly all cruise ships will never sail again.
    Restaurants and bars are going to struggle for a very long time as crowds stay away.
    Internet businesses will thrive.
    IT businesses will thrive helping people to keep WFH even when its safe(ish) to go back to the office.
    Gyms, cinemas, theatres all have very difficult work to do and many will not survive.
    There is going to be a strong drive here and elsewhere to domestic sufficiency with more things manufactured and grown here rather than relying upon international supply chains.
    This is going to undermine free trade and drive us back to mercantilism.
    The State is going to be far more interventionist and a much bigger player in our economy for good or ill.
    How all this shakes out is hard to be completely confident about. We will be poorer, that is for sure, but there will be opportunities.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613

    Restrictions to tackle the spread of the coronavirus in Switzerland will be gradually relaxed from April 27.

    On Thursday, the government said hospitals would be allowed to perform all procedures, including elective surgeries, while hair salons and massage parlours will be allowed to reopen.

    Primary schools, shops and markets will reopen on May 11, while secondary schools, vocational schools and universities will reopen on June 8.

    Essential services.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,897
    edited April 2020
    Well I hope your father remains free of this virus.

    There's a fine line to tread here, and several factors to take into account. Right now, the critical path is health service capacity, and thankfully we appear to be remaining below it.

    There's a case to slowly ease the lockdown as the number of cases in hospitals fall, but it's going to be done very slowly and with a number of *weeks* between each stage to ensure we don't get a surge in cases. I would think that anyone usually based in an office will be working from home for several months to come, but schools, shops and restaurants could be allowed to reopen by the end of April if the number of hospitalised cases is falling.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    mike9978h said:

    I notice the Smithson and the Guardian very rarely post anything positive about the Governments response. How about comparing our world leading employee/small business support with other countries? This isn`t done because the UK actually did well in that measure. Some areas we do well in, others we don't. To keep making political point scoring which the new shadow cabinet is trying to do is just unnecessary.

    Did we? German business had money in their accounts with 6 hours of applying.
  • Options

    On topic, the government’s paramount priority remains Brexit purity. If some people die in a pandemic as a result, that’s a regrettable necessity for them.

    That is an unfair and partisan attack on the Government. We are doing as well as France in terms of testing, and have mobilized quickly.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613
    This thing really is a bastard.

    Temporal dynamics in viral shedding and transmissibility of COVID-19
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0869-5
    We report temporal patterns of viral shedding in 94 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and modeled COVID-19 infectiousness profiles from a separate sample of 77 infector–infectee transmission pairs. We observed the highest viral load in throat swabs at the time of symptom onset, and inferred that infectiousness peaked on or before symptom onset. We estimated that 44% (95% confidence interval, 25–69%) of secondary cases were infected during the index cases’ presymptomatic stage, in settings with substantial household clustering, active case finding and quarantine outside the home. Disease control measures should be adjusted to account for probable substantial presymptomatic transmission....
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    mike9978h said:

    On topic, the government’s paramount priority remains Brexit purity. If some people die in a pandemic as a result, that’s a regrettable necessity for them.

    That is an unfair and partisan attack on the Government. We are doing as well as France in terms of testing, and have mobilized quickly.
    The government turned down an opportunity to get additional supplies of PPE because it would have involved working with the EU. People enjoying this sunny day will almost certainly die as a result of that ideological decision.

    Still, blue passports eh?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613
    Too early, I think, Mike.

    There are plenty of valid criticisms to be made of the government - and no doubt there will be more over the next few weeks and months.

    Comparisons with Trump are not among them.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,639
    This page is amazing: the amount raised is going up by thousands almost every time you re-load it.

    https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/tomswalkforthenhs
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    You think crunching the numbers doesn't matter? Not even for the case you are pretending to make about lives vs economy? What else do you think we should be guided by?
    The deaths numbers being 'crunched are completely unreliable, because as just been proved there is no set definition of a corona death.

    And how many more times. This isn;t lives v economy its lives versus lives. The lives the worst recession in a century are bound to take.
    They are not completely unreliable. Unless you think it makes no odds whether we are losing 3 people a day or 30,000 people a day to coronavirus, we need to take them and make them more reliable, even to do your "lives vs lives" calculation. There's a thousand discussions going on as to how to do this, as you would know if you took an informed and intelligent interest in the subject. As it is, you just want to tell us that you are the only person in the world clever enough to spot that lockdown has its downsides. I would be prepared to bet, if the bet were testable, that you could not tell us without googling it the definition of R0.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Andy_JS said:

    This page is amazing: the amount raised is going up by thousands almost every time you re-load it.

    https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/tomswalkforthenhs

    Some what more heartening than the replies to this tweet.

    https://twitter.com/Benfogle/status/1250673774967611393?s=19
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    mike9978h said:

    On topic, the government’s paramount priority remains Brexit purity. If some people die in a pandemic as a result, that’s a regrettable necessity for them.

    That is an unfair and partisan attack on the Government. We are doing as well as France in terms of testing, and have mobilized quickly.
    The government turned down an opportunity to get additional supplies of PPE because it would have involved working with the EU. People enjoying this sunny day will almost certainly die as a result of that ideological decision.

    Still, blue passports eh?
    When the eu scheme actually delivers any then you can pontificate about it, meanwhile

    Hundreds of the Penlon Prima ESO2, which is an updated version of an existing model, are expected to be built for hospitals over the next week.

    But the consortium of major firms that helped to develop it hopes to make about 1,500 a week by the start of May.

  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    RobD said:

    Official score on the doors. Testing numbers still not exceeding 20,000....Hancock is in for an almighty shit storm when it doesn't get even close to 100,000 in 2 weeks time.

    https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1250782047095922690?s=20

    Although capacity is supposedly already at 35,000.
    I think capacity will be met*, but I doubt actual tests will.

    *One university lab was saying it could potentially do 30,000 tests per day IIRC.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613
    Scott_xP said:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/16/uk-needs-lockdown-exit-strategy-says-key-coronavirus-adviser
    Ferguson said he would like to see the government move faster to put a plan in place for what happens when measures are partially lifted, saying he did not see the same level of planning going on that was put into Brexit....
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    I notice Captain Tom is a former grammar school lad...throws PB hand grenade and runs off.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    I notice Captain Tom is a former grammar school lad...throws PB hand grenade and runs off.

    Were there comprehensives in the 1930s?
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549

    As you are making it personal my father is 87 with health issues and Corona would I guess bring the curtain down if he got it.

    But its surely possible to quarantine older folk whilst at the same time keeping the wheels of commerce turning.

    Again as I've told you this before, that was basically the mitigation strategy and 250,000 deaths were predicted for that.

    If you want to save the economy at that cost just make sure you are first in the queue for catching the virus.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,945
    "I just wonder whether in the UK the Johnson government is open to similar charges in that it in can be argued that its early handling has excerbated the crisis and contributed to the UK having the second highest number of deaths in the world."

    Not sure why this is in the thread header as it is completely untrue. The US, Spain, Italy and France all have more deaths than the UK.

    This kind of blatant politicking does no one any favours.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,929
    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Official score on the doors. Testing numbers still not exceeding 20,000....Hancock is in for an almighty shit storm when it doesn't get even close to 100,000 in 2 weeks time.

    https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1250782047095922690?s=20

    Although capacity is supposedly already at 35,000.
    I think capacity will be met*, but I doubt actual tests will.

    *One university lab was saying it could potentially do 30,000 tests per day IIRC.
    If we're meeting capacity for hospital admissions, expand the testing to more NHS front line or care homes. If we're meeting capacity for those, push out to the public in drive through centres by appointment.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited April 2020
    Overall the government has done pretty well on this, given the huge initial uncertainties and the sheer scale of the challenge. Most of the criticisms are either simple partisan sniping, based on hindsight, or unrealistic. For example, it's all very well saying we should have tested on a much larger scale early on. Tested with what diagnostic kits and reagents? You can't just magic up 100,00 test kits a day for an entirely novel virus, and the facilities to process them, from thin air.

    Meanwhile, over in the US - which does deserve huge criticism - this table of the spike in unemployment by state is staggering. In Michigan, for example: 31% of those in employment in February are now unemployed:

    https://twitter.com/ernietedeschi/status/1250765289689579522
  • Options
    contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    You think crunching the numbers doesn't matter? Not even for the case you are pretending to make about lives vs economy? What else do you think we should be guided by?
    The deaths numbers being 'crunched are completely unreliable, because as just been proved there is no set definition of a corona death.

    And how many more times. This isn;t lives v economy its lives versus lives. The lives the worst recession in a century are bound to take.
    They are not completely unreliable. Unless you think it makes no odds whether we are losing 3 people a day or 30,000 people a day to coronavirus, we need to take them and make them more reliable, even to do your "lives vs lives" calculation. There's a thousand discussions going on as to how to do this, as you would know if you took an informed and intelligent interest in the subject. As it is, you just want to tell us that you are the only person in the world clever enough to spot that lockdown has its downsides. I would be prepared to bet, if the bet were testable, that you could not tell us without googling it the definition of R0.
    Wrong. There are no discussions going on about this, the few sceptics like Hitchens and Co who are asking awkward questions are the subject of a vicious hate campaign - which is part of the reason I am on here doing this

    On reflection, its probably time I stopped.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,945

    I notice Captain Tom is a former grammar school lad...throws PB hand grenade and runs off.

    Were there comprehensives in the 1930s?
    Secondary Moderns I believe -which were still better than modern comprehensives.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,306
    Pagan2 said:

    mike9978h said:

    On topic, the government’s paramount priority remains Brexit purity. If some people die in a pandemic as a result, that’s a regrettable necessity for them.

    That is an unfair and partisan attack on the Government. We are doing as well as France in terms of testing, and have mobilized quickly.
    The government turned down an opportunity to get additional supplies of PPE because it would have involved working with the EU. People enjoying this sunny day will almost certainly die as a result of that ideological decision.

    Still, blue passports eh?
    When the eu scheme actually delivers any then you can pontificate about it, meanwhile

    Hundreds of the Penlon Prima ESO2, which is an updated version of an existing model, are expected to be built for hospitals over the next week.

    But the consortium of major firms that helped to develop it hopes to make about 1,500 a week by the start of May.

    The EU response to this crisis has been beyond peoples' worst fears. The paralysis of the ECB by the monetary purists of Germany and Holland, the complete and total failure to assist either Italy or Spain, the grabbing of PPE off each other and the banning of exports, it has been appalling. Each country has tried to look after their own. The rich, like Germany, have done this more effectively than the poor. It will not be forgotten.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,718
    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/16/uk-needs-lockdown-exit-strategy-says-key-coronavirus-adviser
    Ferguson said he would like to see the government move faster to put a plan in place for what happens when measures are partially lifted, saying he did not see the same level of planning going on that was put into Brexit....
    CV19 planning got less cabinet attention than a 50p coin and Big Ben bongs.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Scott_xP said:
    Given that the EU Head Ursula von Leyden fromally apologised to Italy today for its failure to respond quickly enough to the situation in Italy as it developed and for remaining too slow in its response, he may have a point.

    Von der Leyen admite que no estaban preparados y pide perdón a Italia: la presidenta de la Comisión Europea, la alemana Úrsula Von der Leyen, ha reconocido que la UE no estaba preparada para la pandemia y ha lamentado la falta de coordinación y solidaridad entre los Estados miembros cuando los primeros casos en Italia alertaron de la llegada de la enfermedad a Europa.

    "Es cierto que nadie estaba realmente preparado para esto, pero también es cierto que hubo demasiadas ausencias cuando Italia necesitó ayuda en los primeros momentos", ha dicho en una comparecencia ante el Parlamento europeo.

    Von der Leyen cree "de justicia" que la UE pida "perdón de todo corazón" a los italianos y que esa disculpa se traduzca también en un "cambio de actitud".
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Pulpstar said:

    glw said:

    RobD said:

    Official score on the doors. Testing numbers still not exceeding 20,000....Hancock is in for an almighty shit storm when it doesn't get even close to 100,000 in 2 weeks time.

    https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1250782047095922690?s=20

    Although capacity is supposedly already at 35,000.
    I think capacity will be met*, but I doubt actual tests will.

    *One university lab was saying it could potentially do 30,000 tests per day IIRC.
    If we're meeting capacity for hospital admissions, expand the testing to more NHS front line or care homes. If we're meeting capacity for those, push out to the public in drive through centres by appointment.
    Another key part of the South Korean strategy, their system automatically determines the priority of those needing tests and then schedules them accordingly.
  • Options

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    That is quite clearly incorrect. We'd seen what was happening in Italy, and people were practically begging the government to take decisive action. In the end many people took things into their own hands by voluntarily taking their kids out of school and starting to self-isolate. There is very little excuse for the government's failure to act more quickly.
  • Options
    kamskikamski Posts: 4,255

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    And yet many other countries managed to lock down when they had far fewer deaths per capita than the UK did when it locked down.
    Of course it could have been "pushed through" earlier.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,398

    I notice Captain Tom is a former grammar school lad...throws PB hand grenade and runs off.

    Were there comprehensives in the 1930s?
    Secondary Moderns I believe -which were still better than modern comprehensives.
    In the 1930s? See Rab Butler's 1944 Education Act.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/schoolreport/25751787
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,613

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    FWIW, I disagree.
    And one week earlier, which seem entirely possible, would likely have reduced the number of infections by nearly three quarters.

    It would, of course, have down little to help with getting the necessary infrastructure and planning in place for easing the lockdown. The apparent tardiness of which is (fairly or unfairly) increasingly becoming a source of irritation.

    On that latter point, this is a good article:
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/04/16/the-shutdown-backlash-is-coming-soonwith-a-vengeance-189809
    ...Among the questions looming over American politics is about the nature of what promise to be multiple backlashes over different dimensions of the coronavirus crisis. Most obvious is what price Trump pays for his administration’s tardiness in responding to the contagion in its early stages. Less obvious is what price supporters of activist government pay for the most astounding and disruptive intervention in the everyday life of the nation since World War II.

    The imminent libertarian surge is not a sure thing but it more than a hunch. In informal conversations, one hears the sentiment even from people I know to be fundamentally progressive and inclined to defer to whatever health officials say is responsible and necessary to mitigate the worst effects of coronavirus. It is possible both to support the shutdown and powerfully resent it — the draconian nature of the response, and the widespread perception that to voice skepticism of any aspect of its necessity is outside respectable bounds....

  • Options
    Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 2,749
    edited April 2020

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    Particularly irritating are people who argue "The government was slow to lock down (apparently flirting with allowing the disease to spread widely first to get to an early herd immunity) and the lockdown has been mild by international standards."

    And then go on to argue:

    “Those advocating an end to the lockdown are right in one narrow respect: the current lockdown is unsustainable in the long term.”

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/16/the-pale-horse-politics-in-the-shadow-of-covid-19/

    Executive summary: everything the government does is wrong and always will be.

  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,082
    Well done Mike, there are two clear areas of failure:

    1) No restrictions on entry to the UK

    2) A total failure to ramp up testing

    And you failed to mention either.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    edited April 2020

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    Comparison of number of deaths at start of respective lockdown is:
    UK (422), Italy (631), Spain (342) and France (148).

    I suspect we could have gone into lockdown at the same time as Spain and France (a week earlier when our death level was only 55) but I think it's the nature of these crises that we always wish we had done things earlier.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,082
    contributed to the UK having the second highest number of deaths in the world

    You got a source for that statement Mike ?
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    "I just wonder whether in the UK the Johnson government is open to similar charges in that it in can be argued that its early handling has excerbated the crisis and contributed to the UK having the second highest number of deaths in the world."

    Can the moderators not remove untruths from thread headers?
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,398
    OGH mentions Cheltenham. The Cheltenham Festival attracts about 15,000 Irish racegoers. If Cheltenham made the slightest difference, where is the Irish spike when they all returned home?

    There are charges that can be laid against Boris's government but this is not one.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,082

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    That is quite clearly incorrect. We'd seen what was happening in Italy, and people were practically begging the government to take decisive action. In the end many people took things into their own hands by voluntarily taking their kids out of school and starting to self-isolate. There is very little excuse for the government's failure to act more quickly.
    Some might have been but others were still going to the shops, pubs and parks as if nothing had changed.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285

    Overall the government has done pretty well on this, given the huge initial uncertainties and the sheer scale of the challenge. Most of the criticisms are either simple partisan sniping, based on hindsight, or unrealistic. For example, it's all very well saying we should have tested on a much larger scale early on. Tested with what diagnostic kits and reagents? You can't just magic up 100,00 test kits a day for an entirely novel virus, and the facilities to process them, from thin air.

    Meanwhile, over in the US - which does deserve huge criticism - this table of the spike in unemployment by state is staggering. In Michigan, for example: 31% of those in employment in February are now unemployed:

    twitter.com/ernietedeschi/status/1250765289689579522

    I would suggest the testing policy is the one big area the government can be criticized. Things like PPE shortages, they are worldwide, and bit tricky when the UK biggest producer has all its stock and factories seized by the Chinese.

    Early on testing and contact tracing was good. Then there was a deliberate policy change to only hospital admissions and only use PHE lab.

    Now definitely issues with swabs, reagents and PCR machines. But i think what happened was the government thought the antibody tests would work and they would have 17 million of these things by now.

    Where they failed, was they put all the eggs in that basket. The ventaliator challenge was the right approach, lets develop 4 different strands to increase capacity. One of those hasn't panned as quite as hoped, but we got more capacity from the other 3 and these CPAP masks as well.

    They should have done the same for testing. Opened up to uni and industry and said can you do PCR testing, can you do drive throughs, etc.
  • Options

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    Particularly irritating is people who argue "The government was slow to lock down (apparently flirting with allowing the disease to spread widely first to get to an early herd immunity) and the lockdown has been mild by international standards."

    And then go on to argue:

    “Those advocating an end to the lockdown are right in one narrow respect: the current lockdown is unsustainable in the long term.”

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/16/the-pale-horse-politics-in-the-shadow-of-covid-19/

    Executive summary: everything the government does is wrong and always will be.

    Why is it irritating that people argue that a swift, complete and consequently short lockdown would have been better then the tardy, soft and consequently long lockdown that we actually got? Because those arguing for it may well have been correct?
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    maaarsh said:
    If we go on listening to obsessives like this we won,t be Argentina we will be Zimbabwe.
    You think crunching the numbers doesn't matter? Not even for the case you are pretending to make about lives vs economy? What else do you think we should be guided by?
    The deaths numbers being 'crunched are completely unreliable, because as just been proved there is no set definition of a corona death.

    And how many more times. This isn;t lives v economy its lives versus lives. The lives the worst recession in a century are bound to take.
    They are not completely unreliable. Unless you think it makes no odds whether we are losing 3 people a day or 30,000 people a day to coronavirus, we need to take them and make them more reliable, even to do your "lives vs lives" calculation. There's a thousand discussions going on as to how to do this, as you would know if you took an informed and intelligent interest in the subject. As it is, you just want to tell us that you are the only person in the world clever enough to spot that lockdown has its downsides. I would be prepared to bet, if the bet were testable, that you could not tell us without googling it the definition of R0.
    Wrong. There are no discussions going on about this, the few sceptics like Hitchens and Co who are asking awkward questions are the subject of a vicious hate campaign - which is part of the reason I am on here doing this

    On reflection, its probably time I stopped.
    No discussions ffs. Out of thousands:

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-in-the-uk-why-calculating-the-death-toll-is-so-difficult-pxcn9ppkw

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52103808

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/official-coronavirus-death-tolls-are-only-estimate-problem-n1183756

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/31/counting-coronavirus-different-countries-calculating-death-tolls/

    https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-03-30/tracking-the-coronavirus-why-does-each-country-count-deaths-differently.html

    You just cba to look for them.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    The reason why Britain didn't lock down earlier is the same reason that people are agitating for it to be lifted now. People would not buy into that kind of action unless it was clearly necessary - and it wasn't so clearly necessary until the deaths started mounting up - and it couldn't be enforced until legislation was in place, and I doubt that could have been pushed through any earlier.

    Particularly irritating is people who argue "The government was slow to lock down (apparently flirting with allowing the disease to spread widely first to get to an early herd immunity) and the lockdown has been mild by international standards."

    And then go on to argue:

    “Those advocating an end to the lockdown are right in one narrow respect: the current lockdown is unsustainable in the long term.”

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/16/the-pale-horse-politics-in-the-shadow-of-covid-19/

    Executive summary: everything the government does is wrong and always will be.

    I didn’t say that, because I don’t believe that.

    The government eventually, after several false starts, put together a pretty good financial package for the crisis (though the implementation of that package has been lamentable). The general messaging has been effective, as shown by the substantial compliance with it.

    It has also made serious mistakes, some of which appear to be ideologically motivated. Others seem to be the product of an excessive desire to be popular. As a result, the cost to the country, both financially and in lives, seems set to be far greater than it need to have been.

    The irrational hostility from government acolytes to any suggestion that it has made mistakes shows just how debased British politics have become.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,718

    Overall the government has done pretty well on this, given the huge initial uncertainties and the sheer scale of the challenge. Most of the criticisms are either simple partisan sniping, based on hindsight, or unrealistic. For example, it's all very well saying we should have tested on a much larger scale early on. Tested with what diagnostic kits and reagents? You can't just magic up 100,00 test kits a day for an entirely novel virus, and the facilities to process them, from thin air.

    Meanwhile, over in the US - which does deserve huge criticism - this table of the spike in unemployment by state is staggering. In Michigan, for example: 31% of those in employment in February are now unemployed:

    https://twitter.com/ernietedeschi/status/1250765289689579522

    Indeed, the government has done very well, apart from overseeing probably the highest death toll in Europe at this stage of epidemic.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,082

    OGH mentions Cheltenham. The Cheltenham Festival attracts about 15,000 Irish racegoers. If Cheltenham made the slightest difference, where is the Irish spike when they all returned home?

    There are charges that can be laid against Boris's government but this is not one.

    The Liverpool - Athletico Madrid game was more likely to have been the mistake.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,398
    Has anyone tried IBM's AI-assisted Coronavirus research sweep? It looks like you need to be an academic to get access.

    To help researchers access structured and unstructured data quickly, IBM Research has developed a cloud-based AI research service that has ingested a corpus of thousands of papers from the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) and licensed databases from DrugBank, Clinicaltrials.gov and GenBank. This tool uses advanced AI, allowing users to make specific queries to the collections of papers and extract critical COVID-19 knowledge – including embedded text, tables and figures.
    http://research.ibm.com/covid19/deep-search/

    It will be interesting to know if they have found a use for AI besides self-crashing cars and those annoying pop-up chatbots on web sites.
This discussion has been closed.