Coronavirus Megathread: UK goes into full lockdown

Watch
Occitanie
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#1781
Report 1 week ago
#1781
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
no chance I'm going to go back through some of the drivel and arguements of the last 8 pages since I last came on.

Though it is an amazing testiment to A, just how stupid people are, and B, just how hard it is to get scientific information out there.. that still at this stage people are popping up who believe 'its just flu'.

The goverments announcements today were all good on the economic front. Cant fault them there. I just hope they can see the writing on the wall now each european country is slowly falling into the realisation that lock-downs are the only way forward.. and that they will start to do it proactivly soon, rather than waiting until the deaths force them.
It’s just a flu bro!
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1782
Report 1 week ago
#1782
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
no chance I'm going to go back through some of the drivel and arguements of the last 8 pages since I last came on.

Though it is an amazing testiment to A, just how stupid people are, and B, just how hard it is to get scientific information out there.. that still at this stage people are popping up who believe 'its just flu'.

The goverments announcements today were all good on the economic front. Cant fault them there. I just hope they can see the writing on the wall now each european country is slowly falling into the realisation that lock-downs are the only way forward.. and that they will start to do it proactivly soon, rather than waiting until the deaths force them.
A couple of assumptions are being made there:
1) That in the short term the continental system is better
2) That should the continental system appear better in the short term the government will drop their assumption that in the long term it is worse, or alternatively cave to pressure that they really don't need to cave to politically.

If they have confidence in their modelling they should play game by the statistical argument, not the emotional argument, not least because if the doomsayers are right we're talking about deaths that are a statistic, not a tragedy.
0
reply
Ragman75
Badges: 15
#1783
Report 1 week ago
#1783
(Original post by Marsharko)
Let me clarify - as a place to live in, then I'd definitely rather live in America. I prefer their culture.

However, in terms of a country and their response to the virus, then there have been major blunders on both sides. I'm not a shill for anyone. Trump firing the pandemic response team isn't propaganda.
It seems you are, though. You are acting as if China had enacted drastic measures to save their people against this virus that blind sided them, when in reality the massively dropped the ball and lied to the rest of the world during the critical time period and created this whole mess.

Also on the topic of numbers its apples to oranges with China and the rest of the world. It was important in the beginning for the rest of the world not to be lied to by china about the numbers because we needed to know when to enact certain restrictions on china to stop the disease taking route internationally. However now that it has gone global and is endemic to everywhere testing everyone is not as important as our focus should be social distancing.
0
reply
hotchocolate66
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1784
Report 1 week ago
#1784
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
no chance I'm going to go back through some of the drivel and arguements of the last 8 pages since I last came on.

Though it is an amazing testiment to A, just how stupid people are, and B, just how hard it is to get scientific information out there.. that still at this stage people are popping up who believe 'its just flu'.

The goverments announcements today were all good on the economic front. Cant fault them there. I just hope they can see the writing on the wall now each european country is slowly falling into the realisation that lock-downs are the only way forward.. and that they will start to do it proactivly soon, rather than waiting until the deaths force them.
Has italy been effective? Spain? Iran? No. All have failed because lockdown derails the virus. It will spread again once everything starts. It doesnt stop it. Gosh.
1
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1785
Report 1 week ago
#1785
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
Governments are notoriously bad at dividing money to create economic growth. I think the British economy for the last 12 years and arguably 20 years proves that.

This money will plug the holes for mass industry. Very little will effect small people who will be most struck. Maybe it rallies the market for a day, but it no way makes up for free market driven investment in a stable world.

You can throw money at this,

But we need a biological response ie vaccine get that kill rate below 1%. Otherwise it's just gonna stop total economic destruction, but individual people will still be ruined.
There is limited confidence that the mortality rate is above 1%, remember that the headline mortality rates tell you very little given that until the vast majority of cases conclude, one way or the other, there are large numbers of people who haven't died because their case isn't developed enough, which pushes down the headline mortality rate. At the same time the confirmed cases are weighted heavily in favour of those who are at high risk given at this time it is focused in the hospitals, it does not particularly consider those who are at low risk and only have mild symptoms, or even are totally asymptomatic, remember that the estimated actual number of cases in the UK is about 20x the confirmed case count.

On top of that you have multiple metrics for the real cost, life wise. Trivially you have the straight up lives lost, then you have things like disability adjusted life years which is actually going to be pretty low given excess deaths are generally among the old, and of course there is the excess death metric which is, as the name suggests, the numbers of fatalities above and beyond what would be expected in the time frame; in the UK about 600,000 people die a year or about 50,000 a month, suppose in April this disease is listed as the cause of death for 50,000 people with a total of 60,000 people dying in April, we have excess deaths of only 10,0000, or in other words 80% of those who died we would have expected to die anyway (and trivially high excess deaths lead on to a deficit of deaths as the people who die early don't die when they statistically should have).

On the economics side, the loan guarantees aren't to create growth, they are to ensure businesses have the cash available that they need to not go bust, it is to prevent mass insolvencies among businesses that would be healthy if not for covid, whether that be a small business like your local pub or a big corporate entity like BA.
0
reply
hotchocolate66
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1786
Report 1 week ago
#1786
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
There is limited confidence that the mortality rate is above 1%, remember that the headline mortality rates tell you very little given that until the vast majority of cases conclude, one way or the other, there are large numbers of people who haven't died because their case isn't developed enough, which pushes down the headline mortality rate. At the same time the confirmed cases are weighted heavily in favour of those who are at high risk given at this time it is focused in the hospitals, it does not particularly consider those who are at low risk and only have mild symptoms, or even are totally asymptomatic, remember that the estimated actual number of cases in the UK is about 20x the confirmed case count.

On top of that you have multiple metrics for the real cost, life wise. Trivially you have the straight up lives lost, then you have things like disability adjusted life years which is actually going to be pretty low given excess deaths are generally among the old, and of course there is the excess death metric which is, as the name suggests, the numbers of fatalities above and beyond what would be expected in the time frame; in the UK about 600,000 people die a year or about 50,000 a month, suppose in April this disease is listed as the cause of death for 50,000 people with a total of 60,000 people dying in April, we have excess deaths of only 10,0000, or in other words 80% of those who died we would have expected to die anyway (and trivially high excess deaths lead on to a deficit of deaths as the people who die early don't die when they statistically should have).

On the economics side, the loan guarantees aren't to create growth, they are to ensure businesses have the cash available that they need to not go bust, it is to prevent mass insolvencies among businesses that would be healthy if not for covid, whether that be a small business like your local pub or a big corporate entity like BA.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

This gives you detailed stats
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1787
Report 1 week ago
#1787
(Original post by hotchocolate66)
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

This gives you detailed stats
No it doesn't, it only give you stats for confirmed cases, it gives you no information whatsoever for either of the major caveats
0
reply
hotchocolate66
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1788
Report 1 week ago
#1788
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
No it doesn't, it only give you stats for confirmed cases, it gives you no information whatsoever for either of the major caveats
Thats quite hard to predict.

But it does indicate recoveries (which the media isnt mentioning) and deaths. Also has graphs indicating the spike in the outbreak.
0
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1789
Report 1 week ago
#1789
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
There is limited confidence that the mortality rate is above 1%, remember that the headline mortality rates tell you very little given that until the vast majority of cases conclude, one way or the other, there are large numbers of people who haven't died because their case isn't developed enough, which pushes down the headline mortality rate. At the same time the confirmed cases are weighted heavily in favour of those who are at high risk given at this time it is focused in the hospitals, it does not particularly consider those who are at low risk and only have mild symptoms, or even are totally asymptomatic, remember that the estimated actual number of cases in the UK is about 20x the confirmed case count.

On top of that you have multiple metrics for the real cost, life wise. Trivially you have the straight up lives lost, then you have things like disability adjusted life years which is actually going to be pretty low given excess deaths are generally among the old, and of course there is the excess death metric which is, as the name suggests, the numbers of fatalities above and beyond what would be expected in the time frame; in the UK about 600,000 people die a year or about 50,000 a month, suppose in April this disease is listed as the cause of death for 50,000 people with a total of 60,000 people dying in April, we have excess deaths of only 10,0000, or in other words 80% of those who died we would have expected to die anyway (and trivially high excess deaths lead on to a deficit of deaths as the people who die early don't die when they statistically should have).

On the economics side, the loan guarantees aren't to create growth, they are to ensure businesses have the cash available that they need to not go bust, it is to prevent mass insolvencies among businesses that would be healthy if not for covid, whether that be a small business like your local pub or a big corporate entity like BA.
I'm not going to comment on your clearly cleanse the earth strategy.

On the economics side, how exactly does the government know exactly what will be healthy in a post coronavirus world?

Oh wait, they don't.

So like i said, governments tend to be very precarious at correctly distributing cash. They'll spend the majority saving airlines or pumping money into research.

Jim's donut shop won't be helped and tajids kebab shop isn't coming back. Travel agencies might prop up those, but when does travel exactly come back?
Who was holding onto too much debt previously... Whose going to monitor and assess all this while the government reacts to COVID-19.

I'm not saying they don't mean well, I'm simply saying governments have been highly ineffective in dispersing funds correctly, and if anything they should set up well thought out programs and parameters....both the US an the UK and the central banks have dispensed all ammunition to try to calm markets.....

We haven't even reached peak (bad) news flow yet.

I'm just no confident in the planning aspect, but i hope they get it right... And get us back to robust 1% growth

Did you by chance see the China numbers on covid-19.... First quarter drops of over 20% in consumer spending, industrial output.... 😂
1
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1790
Report 1 week ago
#1790
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
I'm not going to comment on your clearly cleanse the earth strategy.

On the economics side, how exactly does the government know exactly what will be healthy in a post coronavirus world?

Oh wait, they don't.

So like i said, governments tend to be very precarious at correctly distributing cash. They'll spend the majority saving airlines or pumping money into research.

Jim's donut shop won't be helped and tajids kebab shop isn't coming back. Travel agencies might prop up those, but when does travel exactly come back?
Who was holding onto too much debt previously... Whose going to monitor and assess all this while the government reacts to COVID-19.

I'm not saying they don't mean well, I'm simply saying governments have been highly ineffective in dispersing funds correctly, and if anything they should set up well thought out programs and parameters....both the US an the UK and the central banks have dispensed all ammunition to try to calm markets.....

We haven't even reached peak (bad) news flow yet.

I'm just no confident in the planning aspect, but i hope they get it right... And get us back to robust 1% growth

Did you by chance see the China numbers on covid-19.... First quarter drops of over 20% in consumer spending, industrial output.... 😂
The government aren't the ones allocating the cash...
0
reply
Rock Fan
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1791
Report 1 week ago
#1791
If we go into lockdown then the government better help us with the bills we have to pay
1
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1792
Report 1 week ago
#1792
(Original post by Rock Fan)
If we go into lockdown then the government better help us with the bills we have to pay
That is why they have been careful not to put the country in lockdown. MPs are calling for a basic income paid directly to all UK citizens in need rather than the banks. £330 Billion can give every man, woman and child ~£5,000 to support their livelihood.
0
reply
Greywolftwo
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1793
Report 1 week ago
#1793
(Original post by Rock Fan)
If we go into lockdown then the government better help us with the bills we have to pay
'cos we got bills to pay'
1
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1794
Report 1 week ago
#1794
(Original post by hotchocolate66)
Has italy been effective? Spain? Iran? No. All have failed because lockdown derails the virus. It will spread again once everything starts. It doesnt stop it. Gosh.
tell that to all my family in China who were in lockdown for 2 months, and are now back out and working/living as normal with no new cases in there area for weeks.. whereas a month ago it was spreading like mad there.

Lockdowns work. But only if they are followed by everyone. The problem with Iran and the like are that they have not been enforced and followed as strictly as they were in China. As for Spain, its simply too soon to tell how it will work for them. Same for itally.

Remember that even after the lockdown, the numbers kept rising in China for weeks and weeks, because it still spreads within families and in hospitals.. It took China 2-3 weeks, dependign on the region from the begining of the lockdown until cases started to slow. none of the countries you mentioned have implimented a succesful lockdown for that long.

Lets be honest - you are pretending to know things here, when in reality you just don't have a clue.
5
reply
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1795
Report 1 week ago
#1795
(Original post by Rock Fan)
If we go into lockdown then the government better help us with the bills we have to pay
They have already started down that road. Mortgages will be frozen, they are looking at ways of guarenteing wages beyond ssp, and the banks are offering flexibility with other loans etc.

The one I haven't heard anything about yet - and it annoyed me today that they didn't mention it - was renting. Its all well and good freezing mortgages, but that doesn't help the many (often young) people who rent. Similarly with businesses, giving them a loan to pay their rent is nice, but it would be a whole lot better if the goverment just forced landlords to stop collecting for the next few months. Especially given landlords can afford the loss far better than their tennents.

I hope they will anounce something for this soon, but I am not opstimistic. I cant see the goverment going against the interests of the land/property oweners, given that they and their buddies are part of that group.
0
reply
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1796
Report 1 week ago
#1796
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
Lockdowns work. But only if they are followed by everyone.
What will happen when people start moving around again, do you think?
0
reply
1st superstar
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1797
Report 1 week ago
#1797
(Original post by Rock Fan)
If we go into lockdown then the government better help us with the bills we have to pay
That's what they are doing in France I think
0
reply
Pharyngotympanic
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#1798
Report 1 week ago
#1798
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
They have already started down that road. Mortgages will be frozen, they are looking at ways of guarenteing wages beyond ssp, and the banks are offering flexibility with other loans etc.

The one I haven't heard anything about yet - and it annoyed me today that they didn't mention it - was renting. Its all well and good freezing mortgages, but that doesn't help the many (often young) people who rent. Similarly with businesses, giving them a loan to pay their rent is nice, but it would be a whole lot better if the goverment just forced landlords to stop collecting for the next few months. Especially given landlords can afford the loss far better than their tennents.

I hope they will anounce something for this soon, but I am not opstimistic. I cant see the goverment going against the interests of the land/property oweners, given that they and their buddies are part of that group.
Will this be mortgages for everyone? I have a mortgage but am also a student and don't work.
0
reply
travelcollegeguy
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#1799
Report 1 week ago
#1799
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
tell that to all my family in China who were in lockdown for 2 months, and are now back out and working/living as normal with no new cases in there area for weeks.. whereas a month ago it was spreading like mad there.

Lockdowns work. But only if they are followed by everyone. The problem with Iran and the like are that they have not been enforced and followed as strictly as they were in China. As for Spain, its simply too soon to tell how it will work for them. Same for itally.

Remember that even after the lockdown, the numbers kept rising in China for weeks and weeks, because it still spreads within families and in hospitals.. It took China 2-3 weeks, dependign on the region from the begining of the lockdown until cases started to slow. none of the countries you mentioned have implimented a succesful lockdown for that long.

Lets be honest - you are pretending to know things here, when in reality you just don't have a clue.
Apparently Italy Is stabilising but it will take another couple of weeks to see a lot more improvement
0
reply
NX172
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#1800
Report 1 week ago
#1800
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
but it would be a whole lot better if the goverment just forced landlords to stop collecting for the next few months. Especially given landlords can afford the loss far better than their tennents.

I hope they will anounce something for this soon, but I am not opstimistic. I cant see the goverment going against the interests of the land/property oweners, given that they and their buddies are part of that group.
Please stop making stuff up.

1. It's not as simple as landlords to stop collecting rents just because they can 'afford' the loss far better. Landlords run a service, not a charity. They still have costs associated with running the accommodation: service charges, buildings insurance, mortgage payments, etc. If mortgage payment holidays were to be available, then perhaps the landlord can reduce the rent to match their costs, but to stop collecting rents altogether and potentially having to default on their mortgage payments doesn't help them to continue housing their tenants in the long term either. Many landlords could potentially be vulnerable people as well, they may rely on the rent as their primary source of income if they are unable to work due to age or health reasons, or if they have to care for someone full-time.

2. The government and landlords aren't buddies. They have been using landlords as scapegoats for the lack of housing available and in the past few years introduced numerous tax hikes. This includes things like the foreign investor stamp duty and second home stamp duty surcharges, as well as phasing out mortgage interest as a deductible expense.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

With HE fairs postponed, would a virtual HE fair be useful?

Yes (44)
59.46%
No (30)
40.54%

Watched Threads

View All