Sick man of Europe?

[ajohn]

I wonder if we will switch to a covid rather than a flu plan irrespective of the jab. There isn't much difference really other than jumping on it hard at lower levels of spread. It's pretty clear that they have ignored the underlying symptoms of this wave. We are having the lock down now anyway and costs are the same when ever we have one with rather different effects on hospital costs etc. This one to be effective will probably last longer otherwise the whole thing will just fire up again but people must comply and the rules must be effective. Keeping numbers down makes it easier to force things like isolation as they do elsewhere.

As it stands it seems some Tories want it to end now or ASAP rather than looking at it logically and numbers. It also sounds like the NHS will just about cope again - within limits. A study has been done on what happens when they are extremely busy. Higher % of deaths. No idea why. This could just be down to high infection levels leading to more older people becoming infected. More with it means more risk of exposure also more others as well. They now know it has been building up from lower age levels so the question really is why did it do that.

Maybe doing what they have done makes economic sense but I have my doubts.

Businesses going bust is an interesting area. They will for obvious reasons and normal economic factors on their cost of remaining. Landlords want their money etc - there is an apple cart in that area as so much money is in property. Ordinary people have a support package designed to make them want a job when there aren't any. Seems the enhancement is going to end. The make want a job is typical Tory. It's a fact that the majority of economically inactive want jobs but the fact is they can't get one. There is nothing new about that. There was ~ 2m of them. Charity now forms some of the support as Cameron pointed out it should a while ago. It did once so should do so again, not them. Maybe the poor house next.

 

[ajohn]

I wonder if we will switch to a covid rather than a flu plan irrespective of the jab. There isn't much difference really other than jumping on it hard at lower levels of spread. It's pretty clear that they have ignored the underlying symptoms of this wave. We are having the lock down now anyway and costs are the same when ever we have one with rather different effects on hospital costs etc. This one to be effective will probably last longer otherwise the whole thing will just fire up again but people must comply and the rules must be effective. Keeping numbers down makes it easier to force things like isolation as they do elsewhere.

As it stands it seems some Tories want it to end now or ASAP rather than looking at it logically and numbers. It also sounds like the NHS will just about cope again - within limits. A study has been done on what happens when they are extremely busy. Higher % of deaths. No idea why. This could just be down to high infection levels leading to more older people becoming infected. More with it means more risk of exposure also more others as well. They now know it has been building up from lower age levels so the question really is why did it do that.

Maybe doing what they have done makes economic sense but I have my doubts.

Businesses going bust is an interesting area. They will for obvious reasons and normal economic factors on their cost of remaining. Landlords want their money etc - there is an apple cart in that area as so much money is in property. Ordinary people have a support package designed to make them want a job when there aren't any. Seems the enhancement is going to end. The make want a job is typical Tory. It's a fact that the majority of economically inactive want jobs but the fact is they can't get one. There is nothing new about that. There was ~ 2m of them. Charity now forms some of the support as Cameron pointed out it should a while ago. It did once so should do so again, not them. Maybe the poor house next.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

there is an apple cart in that area as so much money is in property.

I think it's a bit of a stretch of the imagination to call an apple cart, "property".

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Ordinary people have a support package designed to make them want a job when there aren't any.

Except the £500 for self-isolation is denied to most.

 

[ajohn]

I think it's a bit of a stretch of the imagination to call an apple cart, "property".

What happens to an apple cart when it's tipped over - it's a pretty normal term used when things go wrong.

The problem with property and the amount of money in it and income from it is where that money goes. I'm not talking houses. The other types are investments and those need to show a return.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

What happens to an apple cart when it's tipped over -

Errr, the apples fall out?
Is this a trick question?

 

[ajohn]

Spoil carefully laid plans, as in Now don't upset the applecart by revealing where we're going. This expression started out as upset the cart, used since Roman times to mean “spoil everything.” The precise idiom dates from the late 1700s.

Maybe that will help.

They had stony roads so perhaps all of the apples bruised maybe got ****e on them too.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Spoil carefully laid plans, as in Now don't upset the applecart by revealing where we're going. This expression started out as upset the cart, used since Roman times to mean “spoil everything.” The precise idiom dates from the late 1700s.

Maybe that will help.

They had stony roads so perhaps all of the apples bruised maybe got ****e on them too.

So are you saying it was a trick question?

 

[ajohn]

I think it's a bit of a stretch of the imagination to call an apple cart, "property".

well somebody owns it don't they.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

well somebody owns it don't they.

I think we're on the same page now.
Yes, it's certainly someone's property.
But what about the apples?
From little trees, great apples grow?

 

[transam]

It's been in trouble since inception, probably since it began boring.

Yes its the frenchs fault

 

[ajohn]

Except the £500 for self-isolation is denied to most

Other countries have shown that the answer is a big stick of some sort to hit people with if they don't isolate when they should. Usually a fine.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Other countries have shown that the answer is a big stick of some sort to hit people with if they don't isolate when they should. Usually a fine.

So a sensible approach would be the carrot (£500 for self-isolation) and a stick (fine) for ignoring the rules?

 

[ajohn]

So a sensible approach would be the carrot (£500 for self-isolation) and a stick (fine) for ignoring the rules?

Other than checking I can't see any sensible solution and that could be used to check needs as well. Too many needing to isolate messes things up and then comes the asymptotics. They have to ask people about symptoms and going on that the none at all % is rather low. These appear to be people who were found to be infected via pillar 2 and asked to isolate. Hard to be sure what it means. We reached ~35% having symptoms and ~5% none. The 35% doesn't fit in with the 18% positives found with pillar 2. Maybe it comes from track and trace / the phone app. Sounds likely. It needs compliant people just as all aspects do really.

 

[Brigadier]

A sensible approach would be to not make rules they have neither the technology nor inclination to enforce properly .

Just nick everyone who is not socially - distancing (unless in the bubble).

Supermarket? Nicked.
High Street? Nicked .


Minding your own business, sitting on a park bench with a coffee? No bother.


I haven't given this any thought so, on that basis, it is probably more effective and workable than the contradictory and unenforceable crap the committee of idiots come out with , on a nightly basis.