Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[madwullie]

5 hours ago, Jacksgranda said:

What % of black/asians are front line medical staff?

Are Covid-19 deaths broken down by profession and race?

That absolute fanny piers Morgan posted this earlier

 

I appreciate this is a bit looks a bit muslimy 

Edited April 20, 2020 by madwullie

[DrewDon]

Fair play to my next door neighbours' daughter, who arrived with shopping for her elderly, high-risk parents about two hours ago and has since decided to join them for a coffee and a chat in their back garden. It's not the first time since lockdown, either. Maybe she's after the inheritance. 

[Mark Connolly]

Read a good line earlier, saying that the spread of covid19 was down to how dense the population is, and to take that however you like.

[madwullie]

2 hours ago, greendot said:

The government is responding through an official channel to a political attack and you think thats corrupt?  How would you prefer them to the respond?  Through a Civil Servants Facebook site?!?!?!  Surely responding through an official channel is the only way to deal with this??  Doesn't matter what your political bias is respond through an official channel.

.gov.uk is not a platform for the government of the day to be political on. It is set up to provide information to UK citizens, nit defend or attack any particular political party that happens to be in charge at that time. 

It is a serious misuse of that domain. 

[yoda]

15 hours ago, pandarilla said:

I'd like to see this discussion play out a bit more (along with the nurses pics).

Every instinct i have says they're has to be long term and very damaging consequences to this. But I'm generally pretty clueless on economics so I'm happy to be persuaded.

What are the main reasons that we can't keep borrowing /printing money? And why do you guys (and a couple of others) think that doesn't need to apply?

 

14 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

You end up with hyperinflation. The money people have becomes worth much less and prices sky rocket.

Following WW1 Germany printed money to pay off its war debts. In the end, children played with huge bundles of banknotes worth trillions of Marks as they were absolutely worthless.

See also Zimbabwe.

The "hyperinflation" argument, when applied to a modern advanced economy doesn't really hold. The context in which Weimar Germany and Mugabe's Zimbabwe operated is totally different to the current environment the UK operates in. It's a red herring and should be ignored. 

 

13 hours ago, GordonS said:

From what I've read by people who ought to know on the left and right, if we don't borrow and spend our way through this we won't have an economy to come back to. There's little point in the country having less debt if we have 30% unemployment by July and catastrophically less money in the system.

Exactly. 

 

13 hours ago, JTS98 said:

Printing money is a risk, but it's not correct to be as black and white as 'printing money = catastrophe'. For example, the Japanese economy has done fine out of the central bank using money out of thin air to buy up government bonds. There are a lot of factors involved in that, but it's not the case that printing money always leads to disaster. America's current approach is similar to the Japanese model, for example.

As for borrowing, interest rates are extremely low just now, meaning, in simple terms, that it's a great time to borrow money. This will obviously lead to a huge spike in national debt, but governments may reasonably come to the conclusion that that's better than dealing with the economic and social consequences of a large percentage of the public losing their jobs: How can the public help a recovery when they have no job and no savings?

Huge debt levels can be handled. It just relies on smart policy. The approach to debt in the west after World War 2 was largely very different to post-WW1, and much more successful. Generally speaking, austerity (such as post WW1 Britain) to deal with this kind of thing proved to be a bad idea as it simply slowed output and made the problem worse. The whole point is that you borrow to prop up the economy and then accept that it's a shit situation and we need to wait quite a while to bring the debt back down to levels we are happy with. Governments could also implement financial repression, where they force banks etc to lend to them on terms that favour the government. 

Handled well, a massive increase in debt needn't be much of a problem. If that debt has ensured the public come out of this with disposable income, then they are ready to go shopping once it's over and get the economy moving again. It may cause a rise in inflation if governments choose some version of printing money to accompany borrowing, but short-term that's not going to lead to a Zimbabwe situation.

So, I think the government will continue to borrow their way out of this. Certain newspapers will bang on about rising national debt, but it's not really something to panic about, especially when compared to the alternative.

A good post.

 

A spike in the national debt is largely irrelevant for us normal people. Japan hasn't turned into a failed state despite having a debt ratio of more than 230%. It can still borrow and it still has a functioning economy (albeit one which operates in a slow growth, low inflation, zero-percent interest rates environment). Don't believe the politically motivated "the government runs like your household!" slogans, which are backed by pretty flimsy supporting evidence. The best way to "reduce" the debt is by running a surplus with a thriving economy, rather than hacking away at essential public services and reducing growth (not that the Cameron government succeeded in that objective...)

Obviously the government funding wages and businesses - essentially being consumer and employer of last resort - is not a sustainable policy option in the long-term. But we're not talking long-term. We're talking short-term; and given the alternative is mass unemployment and business failures, ratcheting up the debt doesn't seem like such a bad idea.

[DiegoDiego]

Read a good line earlier, saying that the spread of covid19 was down to how dense the population is, and to take that however you like.

I will take it as nonsense, as I've shown using data earlier on this thread.

[The DA]

54 minutes ago, greendot said:

 

The government, funded by the tax payer, so any response they give will be off the tax payer's funded mechanism.  So unfortunately i think it's you that's thick as pig shit I'm afraid........

By responding via the non-political NHS site, Cummings is trying to manipulate us into thinking its an NHS issue rather than an issue caused by Boris's government.

[bennett]

8 minutes ago, madwullie said:

That absolute fanny piers Morgan posted this earlier

 

I appreciate this is a bit looks a bit muslimy 

Have families been asked for permission for this?

Morgan really is milking this for all he can get.

 

[Savage Henry]

.gov.uk is not a platform for the government of the day to be political on. It is set up to provide information to UK citizens, nit defend or attack any particular political party that happens to be in charge at that time. 
It is a serious misuse of that domain. 

Would you say the same about the Yes manifesto being published on the Scottish government website?

[ArabianKnight]

Just had a meeting with work. Our industry body has told us to expect smaller retail opening after the current period of lockdown finishes. 

Our retail director is of course over the moon. 

Fair fucks to the company I work for, after acting like total shitecunts at the start they are going to be implementing a lot of measures to keep us and the public safe 

[Herman Hessian]

...and just when you thought Greta Thunberg was off the front pages for a while, The Guardian gives here a gilt-edged invitation to be back on her soapbox again:

Air pollution may be ‘key contributor’ to Covid-19 deaths – study

Quote

High levels of air pollution may be “one of the most important contributors” to deaths from Covid-19, according to research.

The analysis shows that of the coronavirus deaths across 66 administrative regions in Italy, Spain, France and Germany, 78% of them occurred in just five regions, and these were the most polluted.

The research examined levels of nitrogen dioxide, a pollutant produced mostly by diesel vehicles, and weather conditions that can prevent dirty air from dispersing away from a city. Many studies have linked NO2 exposure to health damage, and particularly lung disease, which could make people more likely to die if they contract Covid-19.

“The results indicate that long-term exposure to this pollutant may be one of the most important contributors to fatality caused by the Covid-19 virus in these regions and maybe across the whole world,” said Yaron Ogen, at Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg in Germany, who conducted the research. “Poisoning our environment means poisoning our own body, and when it experiences chronic respiratory stress its ability to defend itself from infections is limited.”

The analysis is only able to show a strong correlation, not a causal link. “It is now necessary to examine whether the presence of an initial inflammatory condition is related to the response of the immune system to the coronavirus,” Ogen said.

A separate study published on 7 April looked at fine particle pollution in the US and found that even small increases in levels in the years before the pandemic were associated with far higher Covid-19 death rates. Another recent paper noted that the high death rates seen in the north of Italy correlated with the highest levels of air pollution.

The new research, published in the journal Science of the Total Environment, compared NO2 levels in January and February in 66 administrative regions with Covid-19 deaths recorded up to 19 March. Ogen also assessed the atmospheric conditions to see where pollution was being trapped over the regions.

and  more....

 

[madwullie]

12 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

*spits coffee*

 

Note the bandana round her neck she's really only wearing as a very cool cravat

[madwullie]

9 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

 

Would you say the same about the Yes manifesto being published on the Scottish government website?

 

Good question. Not sure. But a response to an article in the press (which incident reads like a drunk text to your ex refuting all the points she made in her break up letter) certainly shouldn't be posted on a civil service platform. 

Edited April 20, 2020 by madwullie

[Detournement]

9 minutes ago, yoda said:

 

The "hyperinflation" argument, when applied to a modern advanced economy doesn't really hold. The context in which Weimar Germany and Mugabe's Zimbabwe operated is totally different to the current environment the UK operates in. It's a red herring and should be ignored. 

 

Exactly. 

 

A good post.

 

A spike in the national debt is largely irrelevant for us normal people. Japan hasn't turned into a failed state despite having a debt ratio of more than 230%. It can still borrow and it still has a functioning economy (albeit one which operates in a slow growth, low inflation, zero-percent interest rates environment). Don't believe the politically motivated "the government runs like your household!" slogans, which are backed by pretty flimsy supporting evidence. The best way to "reduce" the debt is by running a surplus with a thriving economy, rather than hacking away at essential public services and reducing growth (not that the Cameron government succeeded in that objective...)

Obviously the government funding wages and businesses - essentially being consumer and employer of last resort - is not a sustainable policy option in the long-term. But we're not talking long-term.

The Bank of England have nodded towards direct Central Bank funding of government and the Financial Times have softly came out in favour of it. I think it has to happen as the public finances will never recover from £3 trillion plus public debt if they stick with taxation and bond markets to fund public services through the next 12 months or so. 

This is the biggest domestic issue we face and sadly the majority of the population and the media are clueless about it. I don't expect any leadership from Starmer either.

[Jacksgranda]

16 minutes ago, madwullie said:

That absolute fanny piers Morgan posted this earlier

 

I appreciate this is a bit looks a bit muslimy 

That's fair enough, certainly 50% + black/asian deaths there. But can you extrapolate that over the other 16000 deaths?

And what's the bolded bit supposed to mean?

[NotThePars]

3 minutes ago, Herman Hessian said:

...and just when you thought Greta Thunberg was off the front pages for a while, The Guardian gives here a gilt-edged invitation to be back on her soapbox again:

Air pollution may be ‘key contributor’ to Covid-19 deaths – study

 

Weird if that was your takeaway from that article.

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, MixuFixit said:

 

That's the way it should be.

[Detournement]

I'd be interested to know if the figures for BAME deaths are consistent between those born in the UK and outside the UK. 

[Cornishman]

Interesting. Particularly, the interview halfway through.

 

https://21stcenturywire.com/2020/04/15/herd-immunity-expert-explains-why-covid-19-lockdown-social-distancing-doesnt-actually-work/

[Herman Hessian]

1 minute ago, NotThePars said:

Weird if that was your takeaway from that article.

only that she's the self-appointed voice of the wider "green" movement - i'd expect her to make a big thing of these findings, and quite rightly so - just my usual flippant way of characterising things; on the wider subject, the ongoing developments with regard to uncovering the pathogenesis, potential vaccinations or treatments, environmental influences, transmission mechanism etc etc - such as this hypothesis -  really are quite fascinating - proper science in action and a refreshing way to get a handle on what's going on away from the tabloid sensationalism of neighbourly disputes over social distancing non-observance, empty shelves and the rest...