On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:17:44 -0500, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

abelard wrote:

how seriously dead will they be?

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is
slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one
thing you can do.

bury your mistakes

--
www.abelard.org

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:28:51 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:17:44 -0500, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

abelard wrote:

how seriously dead will they be?

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is
slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one
thing you can do.

Any cannibals or necrophiliacs here?

How soon before we hear the cries of "Bring out your dead"?
I haven't heard that since the Black Death!

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:03:47 +0100, abelard
wrote:

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 15:17:44 -0500, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

abelard wrote:

how seriously dead will they be?

There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is
slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one
thing you can do.

bury your mistakes

The medical industry's slogan.

On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
I think this situation is going to be the kiss of death for this
government anyway, they are in a no-win situation whatever they do. The
one thing they have got going for them is the continuing stupidity of
the labour party which still doesn't have a leader or a coherent policy
on anything.


Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

https://youtu.be/hiKuxfcSrEU

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as
Spit the dummy to reply

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:46:56 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

https://youtu.be/hiKuxfcSrEU

Hilarious. Want to see what happens when the economy collapses?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XsxD1Y7knI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GovzMEgESKA

But yeah, thats far better than dealing with some ill elderly people who may
die a year or 2 earlier that they would have done otherwise.

And if you think I'm scaremongering look how fast the riots in london took off
a few years ago.

Am 20.03.2020 um 12:05 schrieb :
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:46:56 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

https://youtu.be/hiKuxfcSrEU

Hilarious. Want to see what happens when the economy collapses?
[Venezuela Food Riots]

A massive turn-down of the economy is significantly less than a collapse
of the economy. Bexiteers accepted a massive turn-down of the economy,
claiming that there will be sufficient food to prevent riots.
Now, European countries accept a massive turn-down of the economy
claiming there will be sufficient food. What's the difference?

But yeah, thats far better than dealing with some ill elderly people who may
die a year or 2 earlier that they would have done otherwise.

Loom at Milan, it's not "elderly people dying one or two years earlier",
i's middle-aged people dying partly due to a complete break-down of the
medical infrastrcture.

Additionally, if 30% of the workforce go on sick leave at the same time
for two weeks, the economy will turn down quite a bit as well (and this
might casue food shortages and riots), if people important for the
infrastructure go on sick leave in a staggered way, the chance of
keeping basic services running is a lot higher.

wrote:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:46:56 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

https://youtu.be/hiKuxfcSrEU

Hilarious. Want to see what happens when the economy collapses?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XsxD1Y7knI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GovzMEgESKA

But yeah, thats far better than dealing with some ill elderly people who may
die a year or 2 earlier that they would have done otherwise.

And if you think I'm scaremongering look how fast the riots in london took off
a few years ago.

I don’t think you’re scaremongering, I think you’re missing the point -
it’s not going to be “what if old people die, I’m alright, Jack�; if we get
the science wrong then the economy tanks just the same as if getting the
science right but ignoring the economy does. Signs are that the government
hasn’t really got it, or doesn’t care.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as
Spit the dummy to reply

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 13:07:51 +0100
Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 20.03.2020 um 12:05 schrieb :
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:46:56 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 16:29:33 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Actually, I think the UK government is handling it fairly well, no worse
than other European countries, and much better than the US. The
government's decisions are being made with the best available scientific
advice, and they're not afraid to change course when the advice changes.

The scientific advice is merely a detached objective view of how to best
contain the spread of a disease. It is not taking the short or long term
economic or social consequencies into account.

https://youtu.be/hiKuxfcSrEU

Hilarious. Want to see what happens when the economy collapses?
[Venezuela Food Riots]

A massive turn-down of the economy is significantly less than a collapse
of the economy. Bexiteers accepted a massive turn-down of the economy,

They did? Thats news to me.

claiming that there will be sufficient food to prevent riots.
Now, European countries accept a massive turn-down of the economy
claiming there will be sufficient food. What's the difference?

Food doesn't magically appear out of nowhere even if not imported. Someone has
to farm it, someone has to deliver it, there has to be supermarket staff to
unload it and stock the shelves, do the tills, there has to be a factory making
fertilizer for the farmers etc etc etc. If even 1 of those parts goes tits up
the lot goes tits up.

But yeah, thats far better than dealing with some ill elderly people who may
die a year or 2 earlier that they would have done otherwise.

Loom at Milan, it's not "elderly people dying one or two years earlier",
i's middle-aged people dying partly due to a complete break-down of the
medical infrastrcture.

********. Now whose scaremongering?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-died-from-vir
us-had-other-illness-italy-says

Additionally, if 30% of the workforce go on sick leave at the same time

They won't , 80% have very mild or no symptoms which means they can stay at
work or at least work from home.

for two weeks, the economy will turn down quite a bit as well (and this
might casue food shortages and riots), if people important for the
infrastructure go on sick leave in a staggered way, the chance of
keeping basic services running is a lot higher.

Except everyone who can't work from home (which is probably most people) is
effectively on sick leave anyway now.

On 20/03/2020 16:31, wrote:

They won't , 80% have very mild or no symptoms which means they can stay at
work or at least work from home.

I used to be a bus driver. Not exactly the easiest job to do from home.


--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]