Interesting article on the subject. "People at low risk.. should be exposed so they can develop herd immunity and reduce the risk to vulnerable groups.. This should have been allowed to happen during the summer before the flu season, to reduce the health service [burden] during winter” https://t.co/h1ihccKnIg
Nowt better than a bit of Lover Boy to dance to after a few sherbets, I do a mean Van Damme Kickboxer dancing impression.
Humanity has never developed herd immunity to a coronavirus naturally (or with a vaccine either). Not even for the common cold (which is a number of different virii include rhinovirus and coronavirus) - but luckily those have symptoms that are relatively minor.
The cost of the Furlough Scheme is estimated at around £40-50bn. There are 30m tax payers in the UK. We could recover the total cost of the furlough scheme at £1 per week in about 30 years. Put that at £10/week and its 3 years. If the total cost of COVID to the UK economy was as much as £3tn (roughly the magnitude of 1 year of GDP), it would take longer - but it would be barely noticeable if the government choose to recover it over 200 years (~£10/week) - and there is plenty of precedent for that. In fact, with inflation after 20 years it would be a tiny fraction of the average income.
£10 a week is a lot of money for a lot of people to pay. And is that the price before or after the interest on the loans the country has taken out is included?
I wrote an entire economic recovery strategy for my city in May. All predicated on a reproduction rate not exceeding 1. But at that time the number and proportion of people being hostipalised or dying was far far higher than now. So if that's the case surely the acceptable reproduction rate should be higher now? If the infection is so prevalent in the general population and yet people aren't requiring hospital treatment then the facts have changed?
When death rates were high his tactic was to pick holes in the reporting method. it’s basically anything to change the narrative in order to make him feel superior.
What's that reply all about? I wasn't even talking to you and was just saying that £10 a week extra tax is a lot of money for struggling households. What exactly is wrong with that?
£10 per taxpayer doesn't mean each taxpayer individually paying £10. That's just the average cost per taxpayer. I think the point @Terry Nutkins is trying to make (!) is that you probably knew that.
Nope. I wasn't thinking about it at all, just replying to the 'theres 30milloon tax payers, thats £10 per week" thing which kind of did imply it was £10 per tax payer. Of course if we just force the rich to pay it off it's easy but to be fair that's not how the post was worded and not what I was thinking of when I replied.
My wife is 7 months pregnant currently and like you say it's very scary... We have 2 older kids both back at school so it's a very worrying time especially here in Selby where we have had a rise in cases over the last few days.
Man wait til you hear about quantitative easing and what it really is. As I said the worst habit that people have picked up is believing there is a link between household economy and nations economy. The economic illiterate that is George Osbourne has a lot to answer for.
I guess we’ve binned this now... not that I think we should lock down but the Govt doesn’t have a ******* clue.
"Face nappies", eh? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-...-giving-people-covid-19-immunity-researchers/