Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

tneva82 wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
Anyone or anything blockading a hospital should literally be bulldozed aside so the ambulances can pass.
And only be allowed hospital care after the people whose care they were blocking have been taken care of.

The ambulances should have the bulldozer blades installed for just such occurences.

Hopefully security cameras got good pictures of the ones doing the blocking for the upcoming civil lawsuits.

Forget bulldozers. Howabout saws. Let's see do they still want to block ambulances from delivering patients.

That would require extensively disinfecting the ambulance afterwards because of the bloodspray and possibility of blood-borne illnesses. Bulldozer blades you just hose off, the ambulance itself should remain clean enough.

And let's face it, an ambulance at thirty MPH with a bulldozer blade should be plenty intimidating enough. If it's not and they get in the way anyway.... well, that just improves the gene pool for the next generation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:


Why?

Because our politicians are well-paid to keep it that way. For no other reason does America allow so much corporate money to go into 'campaign contributions' that are little more than legalized bribes.

That's also part of why our COVID response has been so... lackluster. Big business feels those profits falling by the day, and is screaming at their political representatives to get things moving again NOW!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I am worried by the growing idea that maybe we should all wear masks.

So many people still do not get social distancing.

If they're incapable of standing 2m away from you, how are they going to manage wearing a clinical mask properly?

They don't.

I've seen people with their masks down below their noses, people raise masks to scratch underneath them, even saw one person take their mask off and leave it dangling in their hand while they wandered around the store. And lord knows how many instances of couples with one person masked (almost always the woman) and the other not, completely negating the point of the mask once they get home.

And these are the ones who are at least trying, so many are without masks...and clumping up to shoot the breeze in the middle of the aisle. Even now.

https://news.yahoo.com/sunlight-destroys-coronavirus-very-quickly-new-government-tests-find-but-experts-say-pandemic-could-still-last-through-summer-200745675.html

New evidence to show that sunlight does affect the virus, as generally predicted.

Yeah the whole vitamin d thing seems promising ( how are Ireland doing? They have told people to take vit d supplements iirc )

Iooking at Southern Hemisphere countries they seem to be less effected ,I doubt it’s due to some superior method of lockdown as the media seems keen to report, but largely due to on the summer weather.

Captain Thomas Moore deserves a knighthood. This is what modern knighthood should be about.

dalezzz wrote:
Yeah the whole vitamin d thing seems promising ( how are Ireland doing? They have told people to take vit d supplements iirc )

Iooking at Southern Hemisphere countries they seem to be less effected ,I doubt it’s due to some superior method of lockdown as the media seems keen to report, but largely due to on the summer weather.

Brazil expects breakdown of the healthsystem before the peak.
Bolsonaro has sacked the health minister because he got uncomfortable for him politically.

We also don't really know what ist going on in Venezuela.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Captain Thomas Moore deserves a knighthood. This is what modern knighthood should be about.

No question he's a champ, but the diversionary attention lavished upon him is a real problem. It'sa tough one, because he's obviously deserving of acclaim, but it also leans in to a very problematic narrative. Fundamentally, Heroic veteran raises money for NHS isn't the story. Health service sufficiently underfunded that 99-year-old man feels compelled to do laps for money is the story.

The portrayal of the healthcare as a charity populated by big society enthusiasts rather than essential infrastructure paid for by taxes employing experts is extremely dangerous. We don't want to end up like the US, treating one-legged boy takes job in sweatshop to pay for mother's insulin as a feel good story.

I think that's a politically driven narrative boosted by certain factions nfe. The guy wanted to raise 1000 for NHS charities. He's not raising money for NHS funding.

nfe wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Captain Thomas Moore deserves a knighthood. This is what modern knighthood should be about.

No question he's a champ, but the diversionary attention lavished upon him is a real problem. It'sa tough one, because he's obviously deserving of acclaim, but it also leans in to a very problematic narrative. Fundamentally, Heroic veteran raises money for NHS isn't the story. Health service sufficiently underfunded that 99-year-old man feels compelled to do laps for money is the story.

The portrayal of the healthcare as a charity populated by big society enthusiasts rather than essential infrastructure paid for by taxes employing experts is extremely dangerous. We don't want to end up like the US, treating one-legged boy takes job in sweatshop to pay for mother's insulin as a feel good story.

You’re absolutely right. I assume you know the quote about charity from Clement Attlee?

There’s that guy, I forget their name, who donated 25 million to the NHS and got all the praise. But he managed to avoid paying 36 million in taxes, from a 9 billion pound fortune. So he’s donated about 0.25% of his wealth. Or to put it another way, it’s like me voluntarily chucking the NHS a fiver, once, and then being declared a hero...after avoiding paying 7 quid in taxes. And when I say it out loud you realise how grubby and stingy it is.

I hope, maybe naively, that this shows just how important the NHS is, and how underfunded and under appreciated it is. I said earlier that I consider the NHS as an important line of defence as the Armed Forces or Security Services and I stand by that.

As for the Captain, yes it shouldn’t have to fall to charity to fund services, but he’s done an amazing thing out of the goodness of his heart (having already risked everything in WW2) and I just think he deserves official recognition for that.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
I think that's a politically driven narrative boosted by certain factions nfe. The guy wanted to raise 1000 for NHS charities. He's not raising money for NHS funding.

As I understood it (from the interview with him and two of his nurses on BBC breakfast), he did it for Charities Together because they provide recuperation facilities and other support for the underpaid nurses who helped him after his hip replacement.

Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I'm not sure that's what I'm doing. To believe out to be so, you'd have to hold that nurses' wages are entirely unrelated to NHS funding and the coopting of a charitable effort by persons responsible for NHS funding to frame the NHS as a charity is similarly unconnected to that funding.

Politicians are telling people to wear masks, not experts.

What you're saying about catching droplets and so on is true, but no-one has actually scientifically investigated mass mask usage by the untrained general public in social situations.

There are downsides which have to weighed against the possible benefits.

Masks are just another part of the illusion of safety, which is why I'm not buying into it. Yeah they might stop you touching your face, but then they might make you touch it more. It's a moot point really.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nfe wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I'm not sure that's what I'm doing. To believe out to be so, you'd have to hold that nurses' wages are entirely unrelated to NHS funding and the coopting of a charitable effort by persons responsible for NHS funding to frame the NHS as a charity is similarly unconnected to that funding.

No I wasn't accusing you of doing that. But some political figures, especially on twitter are using it as a point scoring tactic.

Exclusive: NHS rationing oxygen with doctors instructed to downgrade blood saturation targets

UK paid $20 million for new coronavirus tests, they didn't work

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1251231491620732928

"Tonight frontline healthcare officials were told to reuse and launder PPE equipment because of an official shortage.

The shortage is going to get worse, according to the head of Gompels Healthcare which distributes PPE to social care orgs"
https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1251288362486562820



and then which really has to be read to be believed

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1251434219139665920





https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1247565360431280140

"I hope we don't have an inquiry when this is over. If there are lessons to be learned, fine; but if there is just blame to be spread, forget it"

Chief political correspondent at the Independent there.
Heaven forbid that we actually are told things !

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I entirely disagree.

The Tories and their lickspittle media cronies are doing exactly that. Boris’ health is the health of the nation. Don’t we have a marvellous fighting spirit, etc etc.

When the truth is, a decade of needless Tory cuts have left the NHS vulnerable. Government dithering over a lockdown is costing lives - but the only concern is “the economy”.

We’re sorry if you feel there have been failures etc.

Any government needs to be held to account at the best of times. This one all the more so.

When I thought that literally nothing could surprise me about Trump anymore....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52330531

 r_squared wrote:
When I thought that literally nothing could surprise me about Trump anymore....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52330531

Quite astonishing, isn't it? The way to make sure the stay at home is useless is to have it enforced in one state, and not in the next- you know workers are going to be carrying the virus over there where they can work. We're going to have ripples all across the US until we get a vaccine developed.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I entirely disagree.

The Tories and their lickspittle media cronies are doing exactly that. Boris’ health is the health of the nation. Don’t we have a marvellous fighting spirit, etc etc.

When the truth is, a decade of needless Tory cuts have left the NHS vulnerable. Government dithering over a lockdown is costing lives - but the only concern is “the economy”.

We’re sorry if you feel there have been failures etc.

Any government needs to be held to account at the best of times. This one all the more so.

There have been cuts everywhere though. military, police, public services. Of course it isnt good, but what were we supposed to do after the crash? And we may be on track for something similar, or possibly worse.

 r_squared wrote:
When I thought that literally nothing could surprise me about Trump anymore....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52330531

What surprised you here? Completely predictable. Nothing in that news was surprising

 Vulcan wrote:
That's also part of why our COVID response has been so... lackluster. Big business feels those profits falling by the day, and is screaming at their political representatives to get things moving again NOW!

And yet many dastardly CEOs willingly shut down their evil, thieving businesses before the federal and state governments had taken action.

The real world isn't a Power Rangers episode, fer crissakes.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Politicians are telling people to wear masks, not experts.

What you're saying about catching droplets and so on is true, but no-one has actually scientifically investigated mass mask usage by the untrained general public in social situations.

There are downsides which have to weighed against the possible benefits.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html

 gorgon wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
That's also part of why our COVID response has been so... lackluster. Big business feels those profits falling by the day, and is screaming at their political representatives to get things moving again NOW!

And yet many dastardly CEOs willingly shut down their evil, thieving businesses before the federal and state governments had taken action.

The real world isn't a Power Rangers episode, fer crissakes.

Except all the companies that refused to close when orders came down, like Hobby Lobby, Barnes and Noble, Game Stop... I could keep going but you get the point.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I entirely disagree.

The Tories and their lickspittle media cronies are doing exactly that. Boris’ health is the health of the nation. Don’t we have a marvellous fighting spirit, etc etc.

When the truth is, a decade of needless Tory cuts have left the NHS vulnerable. Government dithering over a lockdown is costing lives - but the only concern is “the economy”.

We’re sorry if you feel there have been failures etc.

Any government needs to be held to account at the best of times. This one all the more so.

There have been cuts everywhere though. military, police, public services. Of course it isnt good, but what were we supposed to do after the crash? And we may be on track for something similar, or possibly worse.

Answering this in any detail obviously throws us thoroughly past the No Politics blockade, but the answer lies in the countries that recovered most speedily and strongly from the crash and acknowledging that treating macroeconomics like household budgeting doesn't (and hasn't) work(ed).

That a PM, whose chancellor, and his predecessor, had failed every single test of recovery set by themselves for a decade, stated flatly and without qualification that austerity was over having achieved all that was needed kinda tells us all we need to know re: their having no option, as does their ability to turn immediately to borrowing to provide stimulus packages now that a crises important enough has arrived.

nfe wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I entirely disagree.

The Tories and their lickspittle media cronies are doing exactly that. Boris’ health is the health of the nation. Don’t we have a marvellous fighting spirit, etc etc.

When the truth is, a decade of needless Tory cuts have left the NHS vulnerable. Government dithering over a lockdown is costing lives - but the only concern is “the economy”.

We’re sorry if you feel there have been failures etc.

Any government needs to be held to account at the best of times. This one all the more so.

There have been cuts everywhere though. military, police, public services. Of course it isnt good, but what were we supposed to do after the crash? And we may be on track for something similar, or possibly worse.

Answering this in any detail obviously throws us thoroughly past the No Politics blockade, but the answer lies in the countries that recovered most speedily and strongly from the crash and acknowledging that treating macroeconomics like household budgeting doesn't (and hasn't) work(ed).

That a PM, whose chancellor, and his predecessor, had failed every single test of recovery set by themselves for a decade, stated flatly and without qualification that austerity was over having achieved all that was needed kinda tells us all we need to know re: their having no option, as does their ability to turn immediately to borrowing to provide stimulus packages now that a crises important enough has arrived.

Germany follows the black zero approach, switzerland has what is called a Schuldenbremse and basically therefore 0 debt and just threw as a stop gap the profit from last year at the problem. 40'000'000'000 CHF btw, just as stopgap.
Both have, especially in the case of germany, flattened not only the curve but also massive ammounts of financial playground preciscly because they treated it like a household budget. Further germany has more then enough capacity and is helping out other european nations, just as we did.
If that isn't the baseline proof that a black 0 in a normal budget is actually an workable approach then i don't know what else.

Meanwhile in italy there are lawsuits incoming, the government seems to have failed and the market isn't even really anymore considering lending them money for a stimulus packet, hence the whole Eurobonds discusssion 2.0.

Not Online!!! wrote:


Why?

Because our politicians are well-paid to keep it that way. For no other reason does America allow so much corporate money to go into 'campaign contributions' that are little more than legalized bribes.

That's also part of why our COVID response has been so... lackluster. Big business feels those profits falling by the day, and is screaming at their political representatives to get things moving again NOW!

You see, i can understand the whole financing of parties or politicians, but normally if a politican then grants the money, one would expect that he also expects the goods to change hands.
Btw: "laughing Man" corruption, because that is what it is, is not capitalistic. Capitalistic would be if they would've gone to companies and ordered a competition for the work.

Not Online!!! wrote:

nfe wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Exactly. So using it as a way to score political points about NHS funding is a little out of order in my opinion.

I entirely disagree.

The Tories and their lickspittle media cronies are doing exactly that. Boris’ health is the health of the nation. Don’t we have a marvellous fighting spirit, etc etc.

When the truth is, a decade of needless Tory cuts have left the NHS vulnerable. Government dithering over a lockdown is costing lives - but the only concern is “the economy”.

We’re sorry if you feel there have been failures etc.

Any government needs to be held to account at the best of times. This one all the more so.

There have been cuts everywhere though. military, police, public services. Of course it isnt good, but what were we supposed to do after the crash? And we may be on track for something similar, or possibly worse.

Answering this in any detail obviously throws us thoroughly past the No Politics blockade, but the answer lies in the countries that recovered most speedily and strongly from the crash and acknowledging that treating macroeconomics like household budgeting doesn't (and hasn't) work(ed).

That a PM, whose chancellor, and his predecessor, had failed every single test of recovery set by themselves for a decade, stated flatly and without qualification that austerity was over having achieved all that was needed kinda tells us all we need to know re: their having no option, as does their ability to turn immediately to borrowing to provide stimulus packages now that a crises important enough has arrived.

Germany follows the black zero approach, switzerland has what is called a Schuldenbremse and basically therefore 0 debt and just threw as a stop gap the profit from last year at the problem. 40'000'000'000 CHF btw, just as stopgap.
Both have, especially in the case of germany, flattened not only the curve but also massive ammounts of financial playground preciscly because they treated it like a household budget. Further germany has more then enough capacity and is helping out other european nations, just as we did.
If that isn't the baseline proof that a black 0 in a normal budget is actually an workable approach then i don't know what else.

A cursory google gives Germany's debt at over 60% of GDP and Switzerlands at above 40%. Both have been decreasing their debt shaply, but this has occurred since spending increased. Germany responded to the crash witha significant increase in government spending in 2009-10 whilst Switcherland's spending has significantly leaped from 2012 onwards. Am I missing something in these numbers?

https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/government-debt-to-gdp
https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/government-spending-to-gdp
https://tradingeconomics.com/switzerland/government-debt-to-gdp
https://tradingeconomics.com/switzerland/government-debt-to-gdp

No, i (or the gak autocorrect) switched debt with deficit, my mistake.what got thrown at the issue is the Profit of the federal government, ignoring cantonal spending on it aswell ( some cantonal have Fonds others not).

Ok fair enough. That fits what I've said then. The most efficient deficit reduction in response to the 2008 crash has been in countries that invested heavily, increasing the deficit in the short term but leading to significant improvement afterwards - Germany, it transpires, is a good examples! Germany going from 0.1% of GDP before the crash to 3.2 in 2009 and 4.4 in 2010 whilst they spent heavily, then dropping back to 0.9 in 2011, since which its remained below 2%. Switzerland is less variable, but it's only been zero in 2013-14. Below 2% since 2008, though.

But we digress! Sorry all.

In related news we did our feed run yesterday. Prior to that we received an email from the feed store saying they now do curb side deliveries. The marked off an online deliveries parking not too far from the store and posted the number to call from there.
We were extremely impressed as how efficient they were.
To me it's really cool because we're such a rural county. It's just not something we would have expected where we live.
I also signed up to shop the liquor store online who also do curb side deliveries now... Just in case.

I've been ordering booze deliveries too. A couple local independent off licenses have started doing them. They're quite expensive craft specialists, but I'm happy to help them stay afloat.

https://amp.lbcnews.co.uk/uk-news/coronavirus-government-three-stage-exit-strategy/

Talk of easing of lockdown in the UK. Schools, non essential warehouses, shops and businesses to gradually reopen, followed by hospitality industry like pubs, restaurants etc, potentially beginning in May. While this is promising, they say there are 5 criteria which must be met, and the last one is along the lines of no risk of a second spike, which I can see no minister really be willing to risk signing off on, as pretty much all models predict multiple peaks, so I guess we'll have to see.