The people in the shops are most likely to suffer first - less isolation from others.The bigger problem comes when the whole supply chain is affected because the warehouse operators and lorry drivers can no longer work.
The people in the shops are most likely to suffer first - less isolation from others.The bigger problem comes when the whole supply chain is affected because the warehouse operators and lorry drivers can no longer work.
If you damage the economy, you damage the public finances further down the road. All the evidence we have from whether it’s the financial crisis or things like this, is that big early action is better than half-hearted action delayed.”
That's the aspect that bugs me. Economy bound to crash and very obvious evidence that extreme measures are needed to contain it. Early effective action is the only way to limit the damage.
yeah, things can snowball quickly.
only takes a few businesses to close, more welfare support, more debt, less spending, more businesses go under ... repeat ....
No. Nothing like that. I licked a handrail on a cruise ship.There are no words for this.
@Mottie
https://twitter.com/CashNastyGaming/status/1239039704181493761
Now didn't you do something similar.
Negative results are still useful. Having a high proportion of your tests come back positive means you're not testing enough people.Back to thread title
It's pretty obvious what the UK's clever policy is. A model which really is dubious and keeping an eye on hospital cases to guestimate how things are going in the real world. There is probably some NICE style thinking as well. If the system gets overloaded and they can't do anything else more of the latter will come in. That style of problem may be why Italy's death rate is higher. Who's worth saving in other words.
Thought I had better add an edit to that. Initial testing gave a LOT of negatives. Some of those may be down to people trying to make sure they haven't got / have had colds before so wonder if this one is different. The other problem - just how many can they do.
Negative results are still useful. Having a high proportion of your tests come back positive means you're not testing enough people.
True but then comes just how many can be done. That's why I added an edit - what else could they have done? Personally I think Singapore's web based register of people in isolation would have been a much better option than what they have actually done. It seems that as Singapore has been here before they did this pretty well immediately. Only thing is though their people have been here before as well.