Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Detournement]

Just now, Granny Danger said:

The criticism of the Scottish Government would be justified if  Scotland were an independent country and we had full control over revenue raising.  As it is we are dependent on funding decided by Westminster and a tiny amount of discretion out with that.

The Scottish government want us to be an independent country WITHOUT control over revenue raising!

We should be grateful that the RBS rejects who SNP delegates economic policy to never got to implement their idiocy.

 

[Sergeant Wilson]

I've to build a desk today. I may be some time. Alternatively I might just put the box up on bricks.

[Granny Danger]

Just now, MixuFixit said:

cmon man we're talking about basics: gloves. masks. aprons. face shields. These can't be explained away because tories.

It’s naive to look at that in isolation (no pun).  The NHS in Scotland is grossly underfunded due to the Tories austerity policy and I imagine there are far more pressing priorities that stockpiling equipment in the ‘unlikely’ event of a serious global pandemic.

[hk blues]

1 minute ago, MixuFixit said:

which can presumably be addressed with beefier infrastructure, no?

Already covered - cannot be done overnight or without significant investment. 

Hopefully that squares the circle and you can get back to life in the 6th wealthiest country on earth and me, well to not the 6th wealthiest country on earth! 

[Todd_is_God]

9 minutes ago, Detournement said:

No you said the planes have no impact on global warming. Which is beyond stupid.

What I actually said was that if air travel is as bad as it is made out to be, then with the huge reduction in flights (coupled with the likes of China reducing production) over an extended period that I would have expected there to have been some noticeable effect on global temperatures and for Climate Change activists to be making the most of the opportunity they will likely never get again.

Your article shows that they limit the daily range between highs and lows, but no evidence they increase the overall temperature.

It even ends with a theory they may, in fact, offset global warming but that it would need another study.

This now would probably be a good time for that study.

Edited March 27, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[Guest]

1 minute ago, hk blues said:

Already covered - cannot be done overnight or without significant investment. 

Hopefully that squares the circle and you can get back to life in the 6th wealthiest country on earth and me, well to not the 6th wealthiest country on earth! 

I suppose the question could be along the lines of,

Would you rather live in a Rich country like Britain or a Poor country like Norway ???

[coprolite]

13 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

That’s already happened.  It would have been impractical and wrong to close them right away, companies were going to take a hit and that had to be reflected.  

However we’re now seeing companies dropping 12% one day then gaining 10% the next; that’s speculation pure and simple.

 

Once the thing is over, then there will be a genuine and realistic assessment of a company’s worth.

The stock market is always about speculation and profiteering. Volatile movements in stocks protect real assets from speculation. 

You chose to gamble in this way and want to change the rules because your bets have gone bad, it's understandable. However, the doctrine of tough titties must apply in this situation. 

[Silverton End]

@throbber

Please re-instate Alan Bennett as your avatar.

Thank You x

[Paxo]

2 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

What I actually said was that if air travel is as bad as it is made out to be, then with the huge reduction in flights (coupled with the likes of China reducing production) over an extended period that I would have expected there to have been some noticeable effect on global temperatures and for Climate Change activists to be making the most of the opportunity they will likely never get again.

The global mean surface temperature is a 30 year average. You won't see much difference in that.

[Detournement]

2 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

What I actually said was that if air travel is as bad as it is made out to be, then with the huge reduction in flights (coupled with the likes of China reducing production) over an extended period that I would have expected there to have been some noticeable effect on global temperatures and for Climate Change activists to be making the most of the opportunity they will likely never get again.

A few months isn't going to outweigh decades of emissions but the likelihood is we will see some impacts. Just not after 5 days.

 

[hk blues]

2 minutes ago, WATTOO said:

I suppose the question could be along the lines of,

Would you rather live in a Rich country like Britain or a Poor country like Norway ???

What question?  

Who is asking the question?

To whom?

And why?

[welshbairn]

4 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

What I actually said was that if air travel is as bad as it is made out to be, then with the huge reduction in flights (coupled with the likes of China reducing production) over an extended period that I would have expected there to have been some noticeable effect on global temperatures and for Climate Change activists to be making the most of the opportunity they will likely never get again.

The carbon in the atmosphere won't magically drop overnight, there will just be a marginal drop in the increase. Fool.

[Detournement]

1 minute ago, MixuFixit said:

almost without exception funds that all of us depend upon for pensions etc. are subject to this at the moment. It's not about speculating, it's about it gubbing X years of someone's planned investments now, meaning when they come to retire their investment has had to repeat this growth over X years, meaning they have a crapper pension.

The companies are worth less though. It's not down to speculating it's down to the impending biggest recession in history.

[Granny Danger]

Just now, coprolite said:

The stock market is always about speculation and profiteering. Volatile movements in stocks protect real assets from speculation. 

 

That is absolute bollocks.  The overwhelming majority of shares (stocks) are held by institutional investors like insurance companies and pension funds and are held medium-to-long term.  If they reacted in a speculative manner to minor, let alone major, events the system simply wouldn’t work.

You obviously don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

[hk blues]

1 hour ago, Romeo said:

A self employed person I know has spent years laughing at how they bump the tax man. Now almost in tears because they will hardly get anything under this scheme.

Taking the long-term view, they are still quids in.  

[Todd_is_God]

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The carbon in the atmosphere won't magically drop overnight, there will just be a marginal drop in the increase. Fool.

And if there is no drop, if it continues to rise?

Edited March 27, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[Hymlick Manouvre]

6 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

It’s naive to look at that in isolation (no pun).  The NHS in Scotland is grossly underfunded due to the Tories austerity policy and I imagine there are far more pressing priorities that stockpiling equipment in the ‘unlikely’ event of a serious global pandemic.

Isn't NHS Scotland devolved to the Scottish Government, are those hospitals still sitting empty ?

[Dunning1874]

12 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

just explain what the limiting step is. If it can work in company A why not in company B?

Companies will have different setups, but generally your forwarding someone’s desk phone to their mobile scenario involves forwarding calls made directly to that phone. If someone calls your office phone it can go straight through to your mobile, and it you’re already on another call on your mobile meaning they can’t get through then that’s fine, they can call back or leave a voicemail while you’ll get a notification for the missed call.

No one phoning a call centre is dialling one of the phones directly, you have tens or hundreds of calls sitting in a queue for minutes waiting to be diverted to any one of those phones to become available when a call ends. You can’t simply bounce a call through to someone’s mobile the same way you can in the above scenario as there’d be no simple way of knowing when someone’s mobile is available without the call actually being handled on the phone in the office, and if you decide to just risk firing callers through to the forward mobile of whatever phone the call lands on hoping they get an answer then they don’t, all they can do is call up again and they’re going right to the back of the queue of calls.

Obviously there are technological solutions to this and FWIW I’m not arguing that call centres should be staying open just now, but it’s not as simple as just doing the exact same thing on a larger scale if you don’t have the existing technology to handle it.

[hk blues]

21 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Thing that annoys me about call centres is how the telecoms companies allow Bangalore cold caller/scammers to pretend they're phoning from an Inverness area code. Makes call blocking impossible unless you restrict it known numbers.

They're not calling from Bangalore, they're calling from MixuFixit's hoose apparently! 

[Granny Danger]

2 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

no he was saying GD was losing money because he was speculating when it's just wrecking anyone's investments. If I was close to retirement and still invested in funds with a lot of equities in them (bad idea in first place) I'd be very worried just now.

That’s my situation but I’m not overly worried, I think things will bounce back.

What I find laughable is that people think this only affects people with SIPPs/ISAs etc., it effects everyone who doesn’t have a DB pension.  That’s the overwhelming majority of folk.