Seanm
pfm Member
A few cranks are. Most are saying shut down or face mass death. Which also means breakdown of health infrastructure and economic catastrophe.That’s the thing though. Other scientists are saying something completely different.
A few cranks are. Most are saying shut down or face mass death. Which also means breakdown of health infrastructure and economic catastrophe.That’s the thing though. Other scientists are saying something completely different.
He is following the best available scientific advice and trying not to kill your parents and grandparents. It’s not an unreasonable position IMHO. The Conservatives are doing neither and will end up with both a mountain of bodybags and a failed economy. Given the choice I’d prefer just the latter, though there is a strong argument that a very strong and rigidly enforced lockdown is actually the least economically damaging (look to South Korea, NZ etc).
Are there any economists or sociologists on SAGE?
It's called the scientific advisory group for emergencies.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...f-participants-of-sage-and-related-sub-groups
But SK and NZ did their lockdowns with effective track/trace/isolate. And widespread random community testing before lifting restrictions.
If that a no? If so, you see straight away way just « following SAGE advice » would be dangerous.
Interesting perspective when we compre now to how it was back in the 80's:
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate
We've some way to go in terms of 4.5% unemployment now compared to 12.5% at its peak in 1984/5 we did still have North Sea oil and family silver back then though.....Funny you should post this Frank, I was just saying to someone today that we were right back in the early eighties.
We've some way to go in terms of 4.5% unemployment now compared to 12.5% at its peak in 1980, we did still have North Sea oil and family silver back then though.....
4,000 isn’t a few cranks.A few cranks are. Most are saying shut down or face mass death. Which also means breakdown of health infrastructure and economic catastrophe.
4,000 isn’t a few cranks.
Sorry I meant 1984/5 at 12%Did you look at the max graph?
we’re basically there in 1980.
Run away cases numbers, hospitalisations and deaths will destroy the economy. I think they need to find 50bn for a 5-6 month lockdown over the winter. They can release 'war bonds' repayable at a few percent over the next 50 - 60 years. That's the advantange of having your own currency and central bank.
Good evening Gavin,
From a Mental Health point of view, I really hope there isn't a Six Month Lockdown. The reason is different from some. I'll enclose a link to something I may have written:
As it happens most of the left-wing Twitter accounts I follow agree with you.
Don't believe the hype. Many of the signatories were made up joke names. The vast majority of scientists with relevant expertise disagree with the letter. The media bears a huge responsibility for giving it so much prominence and muddying the waters.4,000 isn’t a few cranks.
It's not going to be an easy winter that's for sure, especially now the genie is out of the bottle. I've not been out of my own house at all for anything since I took the kids to the panto on 27th December 2019.
How long before people get genuinely fed up of it all?