Record negative growth for the UK

Watch
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#1
The UK economy looks set to contract by 10.2% in 2020, according to the IMF.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...virus-says-imf

To put this in perspective, the very deep recession of 1973 recorded a 2.5% negative rate of growth and the financial crash of 2008 caused a drop of 4.2%.

It's not difficult to see that very hard times now lie ahead for a great many people for at least some years. :sad:
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2
Report 11 months ago
#2
And when the furlough scheme ends in October, unemployment will be going through the roof! Government will have a tough time increasing investment to stimulate aggregate demand, paying for the growing number of transfer payments, while trying not to tax the hell out of everyone to claw some of the money back. Government spending cuts will likely kick in within next few years similar to post-2008 is my guess. Having said that, the government has done remarkably well in terms of the furlough scheme to retain jobs - but I feel it's only delaying the imminent mass redundancy problem. I do wonder whether it'd be possible for the UK to become more of a tax haven post-Brexit. If the UK government can attract big conglomerate firms to Britain who provide many thousands of tertiary-sector jobs, the threat of mass unemployment may be suppressed somewhat. Although politically that's controversial if big firms get away with paying minimal taxes. Lots for the government and Bank of England to consider - lots to go wrong also!
3
reply
username5252758
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#3
Report 11 months ago
#3
We have the Conservative government to thank for this.
0
reply
Oshmit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4
Report 11 months ago
#4
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
The UK economy looks set to contract by 10.2% in 2020, according to the IMF.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...virus-says-imf

To put this in perspective, the very deep recession of 1973 recorded a 2.5% negative rate of growth and the financial crash of 2008 caused a drop of 4.2%.

It's not difficult to see that very hard times now lie ahead for a great many people for at least some years. :sad:
Ugh.. though thats still not as bad as the OECD's -11.5% contraction. Brace yourselves people... this is going to be a long and painful ride!!
1
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#5
(Original post by JOSH4598)
And when the furlough scheme ends in October, unemployment will be going through the roof! Government will have a tough time increasing investment to stimulate aggregate demand, paying for the growing number of transfer payments, while trying not to tax the hell out of everyone to claw some of the money back. Government spending cuts will likely kick in within next few years similar to post-2008 is my guess. Having said that, the government has done remarkably well in terms of the furlough scheme to retain jobs - but I feel it's only delaying the imminent mass redundancy problem. I do wonder whether it'd be possible for the UK to become more of a tax haven post-Brexit. If the UK government can attract big conglomerate firms to Britain who provide many thousands of tertiary-sector jobs, the threat of mass unemployment may be suppressed somewhat. Although politically that's controversial if big firms get away with paying minimal taxes. Lots for the government and Bank of England to consider - lots to go wrong also!
I think they are tapering down the various schemes too rapidly. They are in a panic about the falling pound and mounting deficit, but it's a bit late for panic.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#6
(Original post by Trotsky's Ghost)
We have the Conservative government to thank for this.
They definitely acted in a far too laissez-faire manner at the start. If we'd followed the swift and aggressive policies of France and Germany, we'd be coming out of it faster and better now.

To cap it all, chronic mismanagement of PPE and test/trace means we will very likely be worse affected going forwards now than many other countries.

The worst Infected Nations now are all led by right wing populist governments like our own.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#7
(Original post by Oshmit)
Ugh.. though thats still not as bad as the OECD's -11.5% contraction. Brace yourselves people... this is going to be a long and painful ride!!
I watched Stiglitz on one of the financial channels the other night and he is predicting -18% for the US(!) and -15% for the UK, with no serious recoveries until 2022/3.
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report 11 months ago
#8
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
They definitely acted in a far too laissez-faire manner at the start. If we'd followed the swift and aggressive policies of France and Germany, we'd be coming out of it faster and better now.

To cap it all, chronic mismanagement of PPE and test/trace means we will very likely be worse affected going forwards now than many other countries.

The worst Infected Nations now are all led by right wing populist governments like our own.
I have to agree on the PPE front - I'm generally supportive of the government but that was a monumental c ock-up. The government were advised in 2018 that their medical PPE stockpile was woefully too low yet they seemingly ignored it. They could have drastically stepped up stockpiling late last year or early this year - and if it wasn't needed it could be stored in the many government warehouses and buildings around the country as it's hardly perishable! While they couldn't forecast the rapid need for PPE, the NHS use it daily anyway so any stockpiles would have been used up eventually if not needed for Covid.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#9
(Original post by JOSH4598)
I have to agree on the PPE front - I'm generally supportive of the government but that was a monumental c ock-up. The government were advised in 2018 that their medical PPE stockpile was woefully too low yet they seemingly ignored it. They could have drastically stepped up stockpiling late last year or early this year - and if it wasn't needed it could be stored in the many government warehouses and buildings around the country as it's hardly perishable! While they couldn't forecast the rapid need for PPE, the NHS use it daily anyway so any stockpiles would have been used up eventually if not needed for Covid.
It was all driven by the austerity mania coupled with the privatisation mania and the desire of mates of Tory ministers to profit from dodgy contracts in the public sector that they have no intention of running properly. This is also what has created the fractured responsibilities between PHE and the other bodies and chronic underfunding in the remaining state bodies. To make matters still worse, they savagely cut the local health teams in local authorities, who in most other developed countries (apart from the US, where they have also been cut) have spearheaded the fight against the effects of the virus.
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#10
Report 11 months ago
#10
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I think they are tapering down the various schemes too rapidly. They are in a panic about the falling pound and mounting deficit, but it's a bit late for panic.
I don't feel it's overly-rapid in terms of ending the furlough. It was only ever designed to retain jobs during the peak of the pandemic, not maintain full employment forever. The astronomical cost doesn't make sense when the death toll is well under 100 now, which while still tragic, is nothing compared to what it was during the peak. I feel Covid has only pushed many firms under who were already struggling and destined to collapse anyway. The only problem is, when these failing firms collapse all at once the economic shock is severely worse.
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#11
(Original post by JOSH4598)
I don't feel it's overly-rapid in terms of ending the furlough. It was only ever designed to retain jobs during the peak of the pandemic, not maintain full employment forever. The astronomical cost doesn't make sense when the death toll is well under 100 now, which while still tragic, is nothing compared to what it was during the peak. I feel Covid has only pushed many firms under who were already struggling and destined to collapse anyway. The only problem is, when these failing firms collapse all at once the economic shock is severely worse.
I take your point. I was thinking of the position of SMEs who employ huge numbers of people and I suspect a great many of whom are going to collapse shortly as the tapers end.

We may be overdoing the gloom - if people go out and spend again and small businesses can recover - but at the moment anyway it does look like whole sectors are going to pretty much disappear for the next while.
1
reply
GARLAND102
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#12
Report 11 months ago
#12
This is what you get for electing a so called “conservative” (although they have not conserved anything) government full of wets and economic illiterates who thought shutting down an economy for months was a good idea
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 11 months ago
#13
(Original post by GARLAND102)
This is what you get for electing a so called “conservative” (although they have not conserved anything) government full of wets and economic illiterates who thought shutting down an economy for months was a good idea
Oh yes, we should have maintained business as usual and lost 100,000+ people! What an idea!

It doesn't matter what party were in government, the cost of taking the country through a global pandemic would be astronomical either way.
1
reply
GARLAND102
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#14
Report 11 months ago
#14
(Original post by JOSH4598)
Oh yes, we should have maintained business as usual and lost 100,000+ people! What an idea!

It doesn't matter what party were in government, the cost of taking the country through a global pandemic would be astronomical either way.
No you should have just told the elderly and young to self isolate along with anyone who may have it that’s all but let the rest of us keep working to maintain an economy because the affects of a recession are far worse for the world than a virus which is not deadly to a majority of the population
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#15
(Original post by GARLAND102)
No you should have just told the elderly and young to self isolate along with anyone who may have it that’s all but let the rest of us keep working to maintain an economy because the affects of a recession are far worse for the world than a virus which is not deadly to a majority of the population
That was difficult in practise, because younger people don't live in a hermetically sealed bubble, they interact with the elderly, the sick and so on. It's basically what Sweden did and they now have a very high death rate per head. Also, scientists didn't know as much about the pandemic then as they do now and the health services didn't know what to expect. Governments didn't want their health services to collapse so they took steps to stop that happening. The health people are much more knowledgeable now and for example can often treat people quickly and cheaply who a few months ago might have died. But that knowledge just wasn't there 4 months ago.
0
reply
JOSH4598
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 11 months ago
#16
(Original post by GARLAND102)
No you should have just told the elderly and young to self isolate along with anyone who may have it that’s all but let the rest of us keep working to maintain an economy because the affects of a recession are far worse for the world than a virus which is not deadly to a majority of the population
I agree, but how effective would it be telling the elderly and young to self-isolate, when both these agre group depend so heavily on the working-age population for care. That would have been the best solution in an ideal world, but the government recognised that would be far too difficult to enforce.
0
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report 11 months ago
#17
(Original post by GARLAND102)
No you should have just told the elderly and young to self isolate along with anyone who may have it that’s all but let the rest of us keep working to maintain an economy because the affects of a recession are far worse for the world than a virus which is not deadly to a majority of the population
Well no, had the UK went into full lockdown on time ⌚ March 13th as everyone else did..(those additional 12 or so days of transmission dif alot of damage) .. Rather than saving the economy and personal freedom fears by a dim witted PM... The UK could have emerged with the rest of Europe, but mismanagement e.g.

Giving up on testing?
Not acquiring PPE causing healthcare worker spread
Not monitoring care homes
Never having an institute to track and trace and still doesn't
A softer lockdown

Has lead to invariably more cases and alot more death...

The UK went into lockdown 12 days later but is emerging from lockdown 1.5-2 month's later......

Europe began phase one of reopening in EARLY May.

The UK has stopped everything...and i mean everything... For much much much longer in economic terms... That's 60 days nearly of additional stopping of economy... For 12 days.

Roughly May 10....Europe eases out...
July 4th UK eases out.....
Last edited by Realitysreflexx; 11 months ago
0
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#18
(Original post by Realitysreflexx)
Roughly May 10....Europe eases out...
July 4th UK eases out.....
Yes, although to be fair, there's easing out and there's easing out. In France they were only fairly recently allowed to walk beyond a few yards from their own homes.
0
reply
Realitysreflexx
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report 11 months ago
#19
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
Yes, although to be fair, there's easing out and there's easing out. In France they were only fairly recently allowed to walk beyond a few yards from their own homes.
We are discussing economic activity... But i see I've hit your national pride. My apologies 😂.

But your also factually incorrect.....May 28th for France...May 6th For Switzerland, May 13th for Germany...Netherlands retail never closed!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc...urope-52837232

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the...-will-look/amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...ards-normality

https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en...le-netherlands

And get this.... Remember we are hear to look at facts as to why the UK has lost sooo much GDP.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobi.../idUKKBN22U117

Yes that is italy on 18th of May.

So sure you've had more freedom, but you've lost more money by not being stricter. You haven't gained anything.. Well ehrmm except your additional excercise right.

The UKs strategy.... The most economic capitalistic European nation.... Didn't get it right sadly.

July 4th....you've lost nearly additional 2 month's!
Last edited by Realitysreflexx; 11 months ago
1
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 11 months ago
#20
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
It's not difficult to see that very hard times now lie ahead for a great many people for at least some years. :sad:
Except for those of us in the public sector, smashin' it.

lol private sector n00bs
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

Should the school day be extended to help students catch up?

Yes (78)
29.21%
No (189)
70.79%

Watched Threads

View All