Is this really our plan?

[rootsnall]

Most of the British population support the lockdown.

I think they do but I'm not sure they understand that the magic money tree will die long before the virus.

[Halo Jones]

We need a referendum on this

I love how on the one hand, everyone the masses are complaining that we have lockdown, no freedom blah blah blah, then on the other hand they're complaining that we didn't lock down soon enough, we want the government to dictate our lives and we can't think for ourselves so will only do what Boris tells us.

The country is full of idiots.

Let's not forget that, whilst the death rate is higher for covid compared to the Flu, there is still a specific risk profile of those most likely to get very ill and/or die of this illness; the old, those with underlying health conditions, smokers, the obese (and this is BMI 30+, not just really big fatties).

Unfortunately the UK has a lot of old people, a lot of fatties and far too many smokers. From day one we should have put all the resources into protecting the care homes/older folks and those will serious underlying health conditions, but instead we instead tried to protect the general population and ignored the private care sector and left the poor sods who live their to the private companies that run them. Bad move.

What this illness has shone a light on is how badly the private care sector is run. Care homes have been locked down since February and yet, despite allowing no visitors in, their infection and death rate is significant. Maybe the only 'positive' from all this, is that the care sector gets a much needed overhaul when this is over.

Careful with that one, I know a Private care home manager & she speaks to her peers in the industry, its her view that 95% of care home deaths are ones run by LA / NHS, i.e. public ones, now this is just "what I have been told" so I can't verify it, but, as ever, more data is needed - specifically who runs the care homes where the infections are happening?

[CheeseSlice]

I suspect when this is over, there will be no money for anything.

It'll all be in the hands of the farmers and the medics who still have something of value to trade. They'll spend it on diamond encrusted stethoscopes, or pimped up tractors with lowered suspension and golden rims.

[Old Greg]

I think they do but I'm not sure they understand that the magic money tree will die long before the virus.

People often (rightly) point out the economic cost of lockdown. But they never seem to calculate the economic cost of no lockdown.

[DealorNoDeal]

I thought that we would surely want to resume normal life...

The lockdown easing strategy doesn't help us get back to this at all.

It's the first step on the road to normal.

Think of it like a journey, say from Bristol (J20) to London (J1) on the M4.

This first step takes us to J19.

One day we'll reach the sunny uplands of Swindon.

[NotAllThere]

There is another way. If you couldn't give a toss if 1,000,000 people die in the UK over the next 6 months, you could lift all restrictions, overwhelm the NHS, dig mass graves, and those that survive can buy a new car and get some nice new clothes and stuff.

HTH BIDI

The NHS doesn't have to be overwhelmed. Just have soldiers applying triage on the entry roads.

Look at the stock market, booming, make the super rich into the hyper rich.

I know. Good isn't it. My portfolio is up to where it was last September. That cat must be made of Flubber.

People often (rightly) point out the economic cost of lockdown. But they never seem to calculate the economic cost of no lockdown.

I seem to recall that an "average" person being killed half way through their expected life will cost the economy about £7 million. Can't remember where I read it though. But if the greater the percentage of the workforce lost, the greater the economic loss.

[Old Greg]

The NHS doesn't have to be overwhelmed. Just have soldiers applying triage on the entry roads.

I know. Good isn't it. My portfolio is up to where it was last September. That cat must be made of Flubber.

I seem to recall that an "average" person being killed half way through their expected life will cost the economy about £7 million. Can't remember where I read it though. But if the greater the percentage of the workforce lost, the greater the economic loss.

It's not the costs of deaths. It's the disruption that will happen in any case as the health service goes into a vicious cycle of increasing demand and increasing staff sickness. People stop going to work across all sectors through sickness, caring responsibilities and fear and the situation is uncontrolled.

[AtW]

The plan is to pretend there is a plan

[rootsnall]

People often (rightly) point out the economic cost of lockdown. But they never seem to calculate the economic cost of no lockdown.

I think there are no magic answers but long term lockdown definitely isn't one of them. People are having to work to keep us fed, the lights on etc so I don't see why people think they have a right to live risk free in lockdown.

[Old Greg]

I think there are no magic answers but long term lockdown definitely isn't one of them. People are having to work to keep us fed, the lights on etc so I don't see why people think they have a right to live risk free in lockdown.

Lockdown isn't for the benefit of most individuals in lockdown, so its purpose is not for people to 'live risk free', and neither are people in lockdown living 'risk free'. It is a public health measure to benefit the population as a whole. Among other things, it allows essential workers to go out to work while keeping the progress of the disease in check.