Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII Read OP For Mod Warnings

growleaves · 18-02-2021 12:55PM

Boggles wrote: »

I'm not the one peddling mistrust's as fact and then throwing a tantrum when called on it.

We will leave there it so.

Since I don't know what "peddling mistrust's as fact" means we'll have to leave it there.

Silentcorner · 18-02-2021 01:23PM

Deleted User wrote: »

It really is the sign of an evil society where the lives and health of the elderly are placed above short term economic growth.

Weren't you the poster who just yesterday believed that we had no choice but to lock up the over 70s, taking away all their social outlets, depriving them of visiting their kids and grandkids?

This is an inhumane and an abhorrent policy.

You'd want some blinkers on not to see the long term damage we are doing to them!

18-02-2021 01:26PM

facehugger99 wrote: »

It's the sign of a broken society where fears and hysteria have been stoked by a media desperate to generate clicks, where the employment prospects and educational opportunities of the young have been sacrificed so that certain demographics can 'feel safe'.

Anyone who thinks that adding €50bn to our debt while crashing entire sectors of the economy won't result in real-world, negative health outcomes to our entire population is a fool! How do you think services are funded?

Equating our response to Covid as a choice between lives and economy is a simple argument for the simple-minded, anyone who proposes it is either disingenuous in the extreme or a moron.

The "50billion" added to our debt is actually protecting the productive capacity of the economy meaning that once restrictions are gone most economic activity, not all admittedly, can resume relatively unharmed. This will allow growth to resume more or less immediately. Not increasing the debt would have resulted in at best stagnation, even if most sectors had remained open.

Measures such as the PUP retain latent demand in the economy meaning many, not all, will be in a better position to spend when things reopen than if the had simply lost their jobs, were on reduced hours etc. which would have happened with or without lockdowns. Much of this money will make its way back into the government coffers in taxation, VAT and excise etc.

National economies do not operate to the same rules as a household budget

https://blog.oxfordeconomics.com/coronavirus/sovereign-debt-safe-as-it-ever-was

Rock-bottom interest rates mean that interest payments – which will be under 2% of world GDP in 2021 – remain significantly lower than 20 years ago, alleviating the need for strong fiscal restraint that could prove unpalatable.

Our global debt sustainability analysis will be comforting to governments and sovereign investors alike. Based on neutral macro assumptions for the 2020s, we find governments can on average stabilise debt to-GDP at 2021 ratios and yet still run sizable primary fiscal deficits of 4.3% of GDP.

18-02-2021 01:27PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

Weren't you the poster who just yesterday believed that we had no choice but to lock up the over 70s, taking away all their social outlets, depriving them of visiting their kids and grandkids?

This is an inhumane and an abhorrent policy.

You'd want some blinkers on not to see the long term damage we are doing to them!

Am, no

Silentcorner · 18-02-2021 01:35PM

Deleted User wrote: »

All well and good, but given the level of cases in the over 70's as is, how do you believe having a multiple of the number of cases in the wider community, many of whom live with over 70's, and having far more mixing would result in them being shielded?

There is a belief being expressed that there is a simple solution. That shielding is possible. The only simple solution is vaccination. Everything else is pie in the sky until the majority have been exposed / vaccinated

Deleted User wrote: »

Am, no

The only simple solution is vaccine....we didn't know we would have a vaccine when we locked the over 70s up in March of last year....but we locked them up anyway, told them not to leave their homes, not to see their kids or grand kids, took away all their social outlets...you ruled out shielding....and called it pie in the sky.

And now you are denying you said any of it!!!!

My good god!!!

18-02-2021 01:37PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

The only simple solution is vaccine....we didn't know we would have a vaccine when we locked the over 70s up in March of last year....but we locked them up anyway, told them not to leave their homes, not to see their kids or grand kids, took away all their social outlets...you ruled out shielding....and called it pie in the sky.

And now you are denying you said any of it!!!!

My good god!!!

I think you have comprehension issues

FintanMcluskey · 18-02-2021 01:43PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The "50billion" added to our debt is actually protecting the productive capacity of the economy meaning that once restrictions are gone most economic activity, not all admittedly, can resume relatively unharmed. This will allow growth to resume more or less immediately. Not increasing the debt would have resulted in at best stagnation, even if most sectors had remained open.

Measures such as the PUP retain latent demand in the economy meaning many, not all, will be in a better position to spend when things reopen than if the had simply lost their jobs, were on reduced hours etc. which would have happened with or without lockdowns. Much of this money will make its way back into the government coffers in taxation, VAT and excise etc.

National economies do not operate to the same rules as a household budget

https://blog.oxfordeconomics.com/coronavirus/sovereign-debt-safe-as-it-ever-was

I really have no idea why anyone would motivate themselves to work anymore after this crisis.

We can just claim PUP indefinitely and put it straight back into the government coffers in taxation, VAT and excise etc.

18-02-2021 01:48PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I really have no idea why anyone would motivate themselves to work anymore after this crisis.

We can just claim PUP indefinitely and put it straight back into the government coffers in taxation, VAT and excise etc.

Short term - 1 billion invested for example is likely net 500 million with the added bonus of protecting savings and preventing permanent layoff meaning recovery can be quicker

FintanMcluskey · 18-02-2021 01:51PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Short term - 1 billion invested for example is likely net 500 million with the added bonus of protecting savings and preventing permanent layoff meaning recovery can be quicker

But it’s not short term!!!!

18-02-2021 01:53PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

But it’s not short term!!!!

1 year is short term in any macro economic sense

Silentcorner · 18-02-2021 02:00PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

But it’s not short term!!!!

This guy hasn't a clue...

Who is going to invest in Retail or Hospitality after this, you need to front up several hundred thousand to get going in these industries, now in the knowledge that the Government can close you down when it deems it ok to....that is before we factor in the huge changes to buying habits...anyone selling a product is looking at a very bleak future.

We are going to see people in those industries financially ruined and we expect others in those industries to step up and invest their life savings in many cases into industries that we have done irreversible damage to...

Some people are living in the clouds.

People have no idea what is involved in the creation and success of new businesses and the sacrifices a person has to make.

18-02-2021 02:02PM

Deleted User wrote: »

The "50billion" added to our debt is actually protecting the productive capacity of the economy meaning that once restrictions are gone most economic activity, not all admittedly, can resume relatively unharmed. This will allow growth to resume more or less immediately. Not increasing the debt would have resulted in at best stagnation, even if most sectors had remained open.

Measures such as the PUP retain latent demand in the economy meaning many, not all, will be in a better position to spend when things reopen than if the had simply lost their jobs, were on reduced hours etc. which would have happened with or without lockdowns. Much of this money will make its way back into the government coffers in taxation, VAT and excise etc.

National economies do not operate to the same rules as a household budget

https://blog.oxfordeconomics.com/coronavirus/sovereign-debt-safe-as-it-ever-was

You forgot to add this bit from the article you linked:

None of this means debt is a free lunch; massive resources spent tackling Covid are no longer available for other things. But major concerns about the public sector are in the tail. It’s the private sector we should worry about more.

18-02-2021 02:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

1 year is short term in any macro economic sense

I assumed it was generally understood that when people here talk about "the economy", they're speaking in terms of how it will directly affect people's lives. About the jobs that will go away in the private sector and the mortgages that will go unpaid, rather than the ability of a government/bank to stabilise a fiat currency over 50 years by keeping interest low (and savings pointless, but that's another story I suppose).

18-02-2021 02:08PM

Deleted User wrote: »

You forgot to add this bit from the article you linked:

Who says there will be zero issues?

But the cloud cuckoo land that some believe exists where there would be no economic impact and all the old people "shielded" if we had no restrictions on the majority is pure fantasy

FintanMcluskey · 18-02-2021 02:08PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

This guy hasn't a clue...

Who is going to invest in Retail or Hospitality after this, you need to front up several hundred thousand to get going in these industries, now in the knowledge that the Government can close you down when it deems it ok to....that is before we factor in the huge changes to buying habits...anyone selling a product is looking at a very bleak future.

We are going to see people in those industries financially ruined and we expect others in those industries to step up and invest their life savings in many cases into industries that we have done irreversible damage to...

Some people are living in the clouds.

People have no idea what is involved in the creation and success of new businesses and the sacrifices a person has to make.

Also our leprechaun economics is now starting to cost us as regards access to the recovery fund

https://m.independent.ie/business/gdp-effect-means-ireland-will-lose-on-eu-aid-donohoe-40100717.html

IRELAND will get less European Union funding to recover from Covid-19 than other member states because of the inflated size of the economy due to the use gross domestic product (GDP) as a measure.

The so-called "Leprechaun economics" effect means Ireland will be spending EU funds on a smaller scale and in a more "targeted" way, Paschal Donohoe has said.

The government has been promised €853m in a mixture of grants and loans from the EU's €672bn pandemic recovery fund.

I’ll also refer to the study from last year, before lockdowns 2 & 3, I’ve been quoting for a while

Meanwhile, consumer expenditure — a better metric by which to assess the national economic welfare, the report argues — is expected to fall by 9.2% after plunging by over 20% during the lockdown period.

Only the UK and Spain experienced worse declines, according to the ESRI analysis.

The value added to the Irish economy by construction activity fell by 38% in the first six months of the year as a result of the pandemic-related shutdown measures. This represents the worst decline in Europe.

Separately, value added by the arts and entertainment sector collapsed by over 70% in the first half of the year, again the most dramatic decline observed among the EU27 and the UK.

The other news today about the Irish banks being the least profitable in the EU should make even the mr Bean economists feel uneasy

18-02-2021 02:17PM

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Also our leprechaun economics is now starting to cost us as regards access to the recovery fund

https://m.independent.ie/business/gdp-effect-means-ireland-will-lose-on-eu-aid-donohoe-40100717.html

I’ll also refer to the study I’ve been quoting for a while

The other news today about the Irish banks being the least profitable in the EU should make even the mr Bean economists feel uneasy

"Leprechaun Economics" is what has protected the government finances through the half million people directly and indirectly employed in the MNC sector and the massive boom in corporation taxes from the MNCs. Its not 2015 anymore. GNP has grown faster than GDP over the past 5 years as real economic activity has replaced the brass plates over the years in the MNC sector

suicide_circus · 18-02-2021 02:30PM

Given that it's the young and poor who will suffer most from the impact of lockdown, i'm not convinced it was necessarily the clear cut correct moral choice when the old and vulnerable could have cocooned but however, whats done is done.

My worry is the next one. The pandemic playbook is now formulated - its lockdown.

Swine flu happened in 2009 and killed approx 150k - 550k people according to the CDC.

If xyz Flu happens in 2024, will be we be back here again? I can't cope with that notion tbh.

18-02-2021 02:47PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Given that it's the young and poor who will suffer most from the impact of lockdown, i'm not convinced it was necessarily the clear cut correct moral choice when the old and vulnerable could have cocooned but however, whats done is done.

My worry is the next one. The pandemic playbook is now formulated - its lockdown.

Swine flu happened in 2009 and killed approx 150k - 550k people according to the CDC.

If xyz Flu happens in 2024, will be we be back here again? I can't cope with that notion tbh.

We know from the lockdown data that a fraction of the measures used to suppress Covid will suppress influenza. So plans should a novel flu strain emerge should check the progress of the disease well in advance of anything other than very isolated local lockdowns

Nermal · 18-02-2021 02:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Measures such as the PUP retain latent demand in the economy meaning many, not all, will be in a better position to spend when things reopen than if the had simply lost their jobs, were on reduced hours etc. which would have happened with or without lockdowns.

"We had to close the pubs, because otherwise they'd be so dangerous they'd be empty".

It's the new 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it'.

Face the facts: we spent tens of billions on nothing. Nearly all the people we 'saved' will be dead in five years. People not yet born will pay for this profligacy.

Silentcorner · 18-02-2021 02:54PM

Nermal wrote: »

"We had to close the pubs, because otherwise they'd be so dangerous they'd be empty".

It's the new 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it'.

Face the facts: we spent tens of billions on nothing. Nearly all the people we 'saved' will be dead in five years. People not yet born will pay for this profligacy.

And they will be joined unfortunately by the people who aren't being screened for Cancer/Heart disease etc, only it affect a much broader demographic...we will have an elevated death rate over the next number of years, all completely avoidable of course.

facehugger99 · 18-02-2021 02:55PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

Given that it's the young and poor who will suffer most from the impact of lockdown, i'm not convinced it was necessarily the clear cut correct moral choice when the old and vulnerable could have cocooned but however, whats done is done.

My worry is the next one. The pandemic playbook is now formulated - its lockdown.

Swine flu happened in 2009 and killed approx 150k - 550k people according to the CDC.

If xyz Flu happens in 2024, will be we be back here again? I can't cope with that notion tbh.

There is another possibility which is also disturbing to consider.

When the costs of this lockdown and the excess deaths caused from Covid become well known, when we are saddled with years of paying back the tens of billions of debt, what happens if an actual deadly pandemic comes along?

The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.

Silentcorner · 18-02-2021 02:56PM

Deleted User wrote: »

We know from the lockdown data that a fraction of the measures used to suppress Covid will suppress influenza. So plans should a novel flu strain emerge should check the progress of the disease well in advance of anything other than very isolated local lockdowns

What lockdown data? There was no flu season this year!!!

You'll have to help us comprehend what you mean by that last part.

facehugger99 · 18-02-2021 02:58PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

And they will be joined unfortunately by the people who aren't being screened for Cancer/Heart disease etc, only it affect a much broader demographic...we will have an elevated death rate over the next number of years, all completely avoidable of course.

We will but these deaths will not be read out to the misery-junkies at 6pm every evening, our politicians will not be held to account for them and they will not garner the facebook likes of the covid clappy-seals.

18-02-2021 03:00PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

What lockdown data? There was no flu season this year!!!

You'll have to help us comprehend what you mean by that last part.

Cause / Effect.

Action / Consequence.

Does it really need to be spelled out?

DaSilva · 18-02-2021 03:06PM

https://twitter.com/DanielGriffinMD/status/1362381417792045058

The study is full of caveats like it should be, but the results suggest that proper surveillance, like a solid testing strategy, symptom screening and other measures had an effect of 17x fewer infections in a care home compared to neighbouring care home. Just some evidence against the unproven but often stated "it's impossible to protect the vulnerable"

Seweryn · 18-02-2021 03:24PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

And they will be joined unfortunately by the people who aren't being screened for Cancer/Heart disease etc, only it affect a much broader demographic...we will have an elevated death rate over the next number of years, all completely avoidable of course.

Very true.

The "cure" (lockdowns, restrictions, healthcare partial shutdown, etc.) will kill and injure (physically and mentally) far more people than the actual "disease".

It will do it directly as a result of limited health and psychological support and also because of family separation, and indirectly (the economic downturn will cut the support to the third world countries and create a spiral of extra deaths from hunger and diseases).

Graham · 18-02-2021 03:25PM

facehugger99 wrote: »

what happens if an actual deadly pandemic comes along?

The boy who cried wolf comes to mind.

:eek:

holy crap. Have we been burying people alive?

:rolleyes:

hynesie08 · 18-02-2021 04:10PM

https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCJayneMcC/status/1362411907894943744

North extends lockdown by a month.....

Boggles · 18-02-2021 04:11PM

Seweryn wrote: »

Very true.

The "cure" (lockdowns, restrictions, healthcare partial shutdown, etc.) will kill and injure (physically and mentally) far more people than the actual "disease".

It will do it directly as a result of limited health and psychological support and also because of family separation, and indirectly (the economic downturn will cut the support to the third world countries and create a spiral of extra deaths from hunger and diseases).

Sure if Ireland never used restrictions we would have had an economic upturn and sure we could have saved the 3rd world.

Be grand, pure genius.

Is this the angle the online grifters are pushing at the moment? Because they were so concerned about the third world before this.

:rolleyes:

KrustyUCC · 18-02-2021 04:13PM

hynesie08 wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCJayneMcC/status/1362411907894943744

North extends lockdown by a month.....

We were always going to extend as well but this allows the government to say we're following the North

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VIII Read OP For Mod Warnings