I have the basic sky sports subscription specifically for super league. Obviously that’s the only reason I use this service. So now I am paying for a service I am not receiving. Not certain if I should suspend payments.

Yes you can - they have sent a circular out saying you can suspend payment for Sky sports

Thanks for the heads up. As I have logged previously when this is all over the business world will be decimated. Picking itself up will be a major challenge. Since my previous missive about the drop of turnover of someone I know. Since then i know of 1 bar and 1 restaurant closed down indefinitely. Obviously when these places close there is a knock on effect with suppliers to these establishments.

Observations from the last few days. Anyone stockpiling or profiteering should be shot on sight. People are starting to understand. Slowly. There are still too many idiots out there thinking it doesn't apply to them. The government is doing a sterling job. This week's measures will save millions of jobs and businesses. The damage is still going to devastating but these levels of support are reassuring. Many thousands in my sector have been laid off already, these measures could save most of them as they can be applied retrospectively even if already laid off. The Guardian is most despicable, divisive, fear-mongering feckin pathetic rag. Makes the Mail looks positively saintly. 12 weeks (or more) at home is gonna be a bstard. But not as much of a bstard as frontline NHS workers are about to face. Calm before the perfect storm. Is the government's strategy correct? My question in response to that would be - so Taiwan (and other places) have shut down and contained things really, really well - but what then happens as soon as they relax and the population floods back out there and flights recommence and some bugger jets in breathing COVID19 all over the place? They're back to square one, whether in May/June/July or end of the year and a vaccine before then is unlikely. We are timing things carefully. Shut down too early and it's pointless. People cannot and will not isolate for more than a couple of months, and the population is still susceptible. Shut down too late and...it's too late. Isolate the vulnerable early and then shut down at the right time and you will already have people recovering and therefore immune and able to get back to work. The virus then also spreads far more slowly enabling the NHS to manage as best it can. You cannot contain or escape this virus, you have to accept that and manage the outcome as best you can. They've denied herd immunity is part of the strategy but it was let slip and to be fair it makes sense. The problem is that means exposing some people who will die, and society cannot handle that. Some people - quite a lot - are going to die whatever happens. I'm not sure why that was such a shock when Boris said it. This is a great demonstration of how it works (albeit the models don't eliminate the deaths): https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... simulator/

Observations from the last few days. Anyone stockpiling or profiteering should be shot on sight. People are starting to understand. Slowly. There are still too many idiots out there thinking it doesn't apply to them. The government is doing a sterling job. This week's measures will save millions of jobs and businesses. The damage is still going to devastating but these levels of support are reassuring. Many thousands in my sector have been laid off already, these measures could save most of them as they can be applied retrospectively even if already laid off. The Guardian is most despicable, divisive, fear-mongering feckin pathetic rag. Makes the Mail looks positively saintly. 12 weeks (or more) at home is gonna be a bstard. But not as much of a bstard as frontline NHS workers are about to face. Calm before the perfect storm. Is the government's strategy correct? My question in response to that would be - so Taiwan (and other places) have shut down and contained things really, really well - but what then happens as soon as they relax and the population floods back out there and flights recommence and some bugger jets in breathing COVID19 all over the place? They're back to square one, whether in May/June/July or end of the year and a vaccine before then is unlikely. We are timing things carefully. Shut down too early and it's pointless. People cannot and will not isolate for more than a couple of months, and the population is still susceptible. Shut down too late and...it's too late. Isolate the vulnerable early and then shut down at the right time and you will already have people recovering and therefore immune and able to get back to work. The virus then also spreads far more slowly enabling the NHS to manage as best it can. You cannot contain or escape this virus, you have to accept that and manage the outcome as best you can. They've denied herd immunity is part of the strategy but it was let slip and to be fair it makes sense. The problem is that means exposing some people who will die, and society cannot handle that. Some people - quite a lot - are going to die whatever happens. I'm not sure why that was such a shock when Boris said it. This is a great demonstration of how it works (albeit the models don't eliminate the deaths): https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... simulator/

Good post Cronus. I think this crisis is a good way of shining a light on peoples' character. You very quickly see who thinks "me me me" and who has a sense of duty/community. Amongst the people I know/ my facebook feed etc the correlation I have noticed is that the ones who are usually the loudest to bang on about "patriotism" and "we should put British people first", are the ones who are now least willing to make any compromise in their lives that might help protect vulnerable or elderly people in their community. You have summed up the basic trade-off well and basically that argument is what underpinned the Imperial college modelling that is now driving the government's strategy: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperi ... 3-2020.pdf One interesting challenge will be, if the social distancing measures are TOO successful, it will undermine support for the measures themselves. What about if it all works, and the death count slows to a trickle. Everyone will start saying "come on, its just like the flu whats all the fuss about, let us get back to work".

Good post Cronus. I think this crisis is a good way of shining a light on peoples' character. You very quickly see who thinks "me me me" and who has a sense of duty/community. Amongst the people I know/ my facebook feed etc the correlation I have noticed is that the ones who are usually the loudest to bang on about "patriotism" and "we should put British people first", are the ones who are now least willing to make any compromise in their lives that might help protect vulnerable or elderly people in their community. You have summed up the basic trade-off well and basically that argument is what underpinned the Imperial college modelling that is now driving the government's strategy: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperi ... 3-2020.pdf One interesting challenge will be, if the social distancing measures are TOO successful, it will undermine support for the measures themselves. What about if it all works, and the death count slows to a trickle. Everyone will start saying "come on, its just like the flu whats all the fuss about, let us get back to work".

[url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654like has been said, overegged numbers[/url

Government playing a blinder not according to this doctor and many others.

Lisa Anderson, a consultant cardiologist at St George’s Hospital in London, echoed Hunt’s concerns. She said the Government had changed the rules so they where no longer compliant with World Health Organisation recommendations, which required medics to wear a full gown and visor.

She said that since Monday, staff in the NHS only had to wear a simple face mask, short gloves and a pinafore apron. “This is not just about the risk to ourselves and our families. We are travelling home on the Tube, on buses,” she told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

The decimation of the public sector over the last 10 years. The complete cock up at the beginning by the government in not announcing proper measures saying we know better than every country in the world we will slow it to build up herd immunity . A model that was developed initially was based on normal flu not covid and the numbers who need ICU.


Boris cocked it up big time and now Doctors and frontline NHS staff are paying the price.

My ex wife is a doctor working with the elderly they have no Gel left to disinfect their. Hands.

My sister is a practice nurse and they have no masks .

But you keep promoting your Tory and blame engine who criticises the government as a fifth columnist.

Nothing I would not expect from you. You won’t be happy until government critics are rounded up and charged with treason.

Tbf, in general terms Cronus' post was ok.
However, it's bloody criminal that NHS staff dont have the basics, in terms of masks, gloves etc

I know that we are dealing with a crisis here but, if my business was asbestos removal and I told the workers "it's ok, we've run out of gloves and overalls but, crack on anyway, I would, quite rightly be imprisoned and yet, we are asking NHS workers to do just this - go into work without basic and essential protective equipment.



On this issue, party politics has to go and a collective effort to get the right outcome for as many people as possible should be the only concern for all of us - there are some real selfish b'stards around and things like this certainly expose them.

Most of them are easily identifiable as they carry a copy of the daily mail editorial with them at all times

Quote ="Cronus"Observations from the last few days. Anyone stockpiling or profiteering should be shot on sight. People are starting to understand. Slowly. There are still too many idiots out there thinking it doesn't apply to them. The government is doing a sterling job. This week's measures will save millions of jobs and businesses. The damage is still going to devastating but these levels of support are reassuring. Many thousands in my sector have been laid off already, these measures could save most of them as they can be applied retrospectively even if already laid off. The Guardian is most despicable, divisive, fear-mongering feckin pathetic rag. Makes the Mail looks positively saintly. 12 weeks (or more) at home is gonna be a bstard. But not as much of a bstard as frontline NHS workers are about to face. Calm before the perfect storm. Is the government's strategy correct? My question in response to that would be - so Taiwan (and other places) have shut down and contained things really, really well - but what then happens as soon as they relax and the population floods back out there and flights recommence and some bugger jets in breathing COVID19 all over the place? They're back to square one, whether in May/June/July or end of the year and a vaccine before then is unlikely. We are timing things carefully. Shut down too early and it's pointless. People cannot and will not isolate for more than a couple of months, and the population is still susceptible. Shut down too late and...it's too late. Isolate the vulnerable early and then shut down at the right time and you will already have people recovering and therefore immune and able to get back to work. The virus then also spreads far more slowly enabling the NHS to manage as best it can. You cannot contain or escape this virus, you have to accept that and manage the outcome as best you can. They've denied herd immunity is part of the strategy but it was let slip and to be fair it makes sense. The problem is that means exposing some people who will die, and society cannot handle that. Some people - quite a lot - are going to die whatever happens. I'm not sure why that was such a shock when Boris said it. This is a great demonstration of how it works (albeit the models don't eliminate the deaths): https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... simulator/'" Fair enough except, nothing whatsoever could make the Mail saintly. I'm surprised but not too surprised that Boris has adopted a sort of socialistic response in a Joe Gormley socialist way, to the crisis. The swivel eyed right wingers who think they are firmly in charge must be squirming in their seats at some of the measures being implemented. I'd say so far, well done and thank God Maggie isn't in charge.

Quote ="Cronus"Observations from the last few days. Anyone stockpiling or profiteering should be shot on sight. People are starting to understand. Slowly. There are still too many idiots out there thinking it doesn't apply to them. The government is doing a sterling job. This week's measures will save millions of jobs and businesses. The damage is still going to devastating but these levels of support are reassuring. Many thousands in my sector have been laid off already, these measures could save most of them as they can be applied retrospectively even if already laid off. The Guardian is most despicable, divisive, fear-mongering feckin pathetic rag. Makes the Mail looks positively saintly. 12 weeks (or more) at home is gonna be a bstard. But not as much of a bstard as frontline NHS workers are about to face. Calm before the perfect storm. Is the government's strategy correct? My question in response to that would be - so Taiwan (and other places) have shut down and contained things really, really well - but what then happens as soon as they relax and the population floods back out there and flights recommence and some bugger jets in breathing COVID19 all over the place? They're back to square one, whether in May/June/July or end of the year and a vaccine before then is unlikely. We are timing things carefully. Shut down too early and it's pointless. People cannot and will not isolate for more than a couple of months, and the population is still susceptible. Shut down too late and...it's too late. Isolate the vulnerable early and then shut down at the right time and you will already have people recovering and therefore immune and able to get back to work. The virus then also spreads far more slowly enabling the NHS to manage as best it can. You cannot contain or escape this virus, you have to accept that and manage the outcome as best you can. They've denied herd immunity is part of the strategy but it was let slip and to be fair it makes sense. The problem is that means exposing some people who will die, and society cannot handle that. Some people - quite a lot - are going to die whatever happens. I'm not sure why that was such a shock when Boris said it. This is a great demonstration of how it works (albeit the models don't eliminate the deaths): https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... simulator/'" Fair enough except, nothing whatsoever could make the Mail saintly. I'm surprised but not too surprised that Boris has adopted a sort of socialistic response in a Joe Gormley socialist way, to the crisis. The swivel eyed right wingers who think they are firmly in charge must be squirming in their seats at some of the measures being implemented. I'd say so far, well done and thank God Maggie isn't in charge.

It has created a dilemma for the right-wing press who wants to be pro-Boris.

They have spent years trying to make out that the biggest threat to the UK, was Jeremy Corbyn turning the country in to some kind of Venezuela, with food shortages, mass job losses, most of the country on the government payroll and draconian state controls with people not even allowed to go out and have a pint.

Now that world has happened, because of Boris.

The virus is not Boris' fault of course, and even the legitimate criticisms about why the NHS has been stripped down to the bone and left inadequately prepared for this should be focused on the Cameron/Osborne administration not Boris. Even a well-funded NHS would have been overwhelmed by this though.

But most of the economic decisions were made by Boris (correctly) and the right-wing press will hate this as if this was a Labour government doing it they would be taking the line that this was "just a bit of flu" and all an overreaction.

Aye and it creates an equal and opposite dilemma on the other side. We might just have to get used to agreeing for a bit!

Surprise surprise, another DG rant.

Almost everything you mention about is to do with either sudden massive demand on disrupted supply chains and/or the great unwashed panic buying. The government won't 'change the rules' at a whim - those decisions will be made based on NHS advice in view of current supply and demand, projected demand, incoming supply timelines and prioritisation of which staff/departments need the best equipment the most.

I'm not pretending everything is perfect - only the perpetually dim of brain would expect that in these circumstances. Yes, of course all of those on the frontline should be fully supplied with the very best kit - but that simply isn't possible, at least not straight away. Just as the stark truth is we have to accept some of us are going to die, the stark truth is not everything will be work as we would like it to.

I saw an interview with a US pandemic advisor the other night. One of his major concerns - despite his protests over years - was the fact that almost 100% of medical-standard (N95/FFB3?) masks in the USA are supplies are sourced from one town in China - which is now in lockdown. I don't know the numbers but the NHS also sources a significant volume of equipment from China. A combination of massive demand and supply chain disruption is always going cause problems. And let's not disregard the many millions of face masks snapped up by the public. Unless you mandate diverse global supply chains and hold stockpiles, in times of escalated demand there will be a period of shortages while things adjust - which is exactly what is happening.

Of course I imagine in your delirious socialist utopia there are millions of Hazmat suits, gowns, gloves, visors, masks and ventilators sitting in storage just waiting for such an event (notwithstanding most of these items degrade over time and are eventually no longer fit for purpose), and every medical facility has the facilities and resources to handle a sudden influx of possible hundreds of thousands of critical patients.

The government has gone well beyond what any of us could have foreseen with their financial support. And yet they could arguably do more - the self-employed, for example - but so far they have stepped up and saved millions of jobs, homes, incomes, businesses, and relieved the massive stress many people are under. More measures are likely. Can you bring yourself to acknowledge that, at least?

BTW, can I make a point you don't seem to understand. The government are being advised by a panel of field-leading experts. Decisions are led by their conclusions, studies and advice, resulting from analysing the experiences of other nations, the very best medical and scientific knowledge, and vast computer modelling. It would most likely be the same experts leading a Labour government reaching the same conclusions. Instead of ranting, take some time to really understand why we've taken the path we have.

The equivalent would be "you now have to remove asbestos from ten times the numbers of buildings in half the time, and by the way your gloves/masks/overalls supplier is locked down and can't supply for a few weeks".

Yes, I agree it's terrible some NHS staff are having to work without the correct equipment and as we know they deserve all the support the country can muster. Supplies will come and this work has been in progress for weeks, but catching up in the face of massive demand and disrupted supply chains takes a little time. Not to mention the public has bought millions of masks in the last few weeks.

And here we go again with the crony capitalism

Profits are capitalism
Losses are socialism.

Yet again we see that capitalism can only operate within a socialist framework.

And here is the Tory government bailing out all their crony CEO and stock market millionaire and billionaire pals with never ending sums of public money, that has been auspicious by its absence for the last ten years.

And paying the wages of its Tory voting base, whilst frontline nhs workers are putting their lives on the line for zip extra is Tory dna all over.

Who asked the public where their money should be directed?

This Tory government Fannied about for a month in protecting its crony pals wealth, at the expense of public health, in my book a crime against humanity.

Any firm that accepts public cash must give the public a stake in the company, and be obliged to buy it back in the future.

I honestly despair the politicising of this issue, but I am unsurprised.

[url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51989183DG, Superblue, do you like amonia on your chips?, the PRIVATE SECTOR just urinated on them[/url

[url=https://abc14news.com/2020/03/21/macrons-france-seizes-lorries-carrying-130000-masks-to-uk-hospitalsand the French do the same to the Socialist Remoaners...[/url

And where’s all the Tory voting, Nanny State bashers all of a sudden?

They’re all stood in the state handout line with their caps out



Well there are plenty of low paid jobs in the nhs, and plenty of zero hours contract jobs in the supermarkets for you lot, not just the “unemployed benefit scroungers.”

Time for you ten bob Tory voters to practice what you been a preaching.

Principled Hypocrites

In the words of Donald J Trump





January 22: “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. It’s going to be just fine.”

February 2: “We pretty much shut it down coming in from China.”

February 24: “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA… Stock Market starting to look very good to me!”

February 25: “CDC and my Administration are doing a GREAT job of handling Coronavirus.”

February 25: “I think that's a problem that’s going to go away… They have studied it. They know very much. In fact, we’re very close to a vaccine.”

February 26: “The 15 (cases in the US) within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.”

February 26: “We're going very substantially down, not up.”

February 27: “One day it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.”

February 28: “We're ordering a lot of supplies. We're ordering a lot of, uh, elements that frankly we wouldn't be ordering unless it was something like this. But we're ordering a lot of different elements of medical.”

March 2: “You take a solid flu vaccine, you don't think that could have an impact, or much of an impact, on corona?”

March 2: “A lot of things are happening, a lot of very exciting things are happening and they’re happening very rapidly.”

March 4: “If we have thousands or hundreds of thousands of people that get better just by, you know, sitting around and even going to work — some of them go to work, but they get better.”

March 5: “I NEVER said people that are feeling sick should go to work.”

March 5: “The United States… has, as of now, only 129 cases… and 11 deaths. We are working very hard to keep these numbers as low as possible!”

March 6: “I think we’re doing a really good job in this country at keeping it down… a tremendous job at keeping it down.”

March 6: “Anybody right now, and yesterday, anybody that needs a test gets a test. They’re there. And the tests are beautiful…. the tests are all perfect like the letter was perfect. The transcription was perfect. Right? This was not as perfect as that but pretty good.”

March 6: “I like this stuff. I really get it. People are surprised that I understand it… Every one of these doctors said, ‘How do you know so much about this?’ Maybe I have a natural ability. Maybe I should have done that instead of running for president.”

March 6: “I don't need to have the numbers double because of one ship that wasn't our fault.”

March 8: “We have a perfectly coordinated and fine tuned plan at the White House for our attack on CoronaVirus.”

March 9: “This blindsided us."

March 9: "The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation, far beyond what the facts would warrant.”

March 10: "It will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away."

March 12: ""I don't take responsibility at all"--- Epitomizing ALL that is Dotard's way of dealing with anything and everything in the US which he can't steal credit.

March 13: National Emergency Declaration


And backside boris fell in synch

Jesus wept. And the left get all butthurt when everyone laughs at them.







Not that I disagree with taking the pi5s out of Trump, fwiw.

^
Laughing with us actually, laughing at you




Closet Socialist

It is striking how fast the economic mitigation has escalated. 11 days ago Rishi Sunak’s budget included a pledge of £12 billion (roughly £180 per capita) of emergency spending. It was a budget that prompted the most recent former PM and chancellor to warn against abandoning restraint and caution.

5 days ago Sunak returned to the magic money tree to offer business £300 billion of loans (about £4500 per capita) at attractive interest rates. Now they’re paying private sector wages that’ll run into many tens of billions. And we still might see unemployment rise by a million.

I think it is the right thing to do but it is (necessarily) huge.

Taxpayers will be paying this back for years - I agree its the right thing to do - the bond market will be strong as investors look for safe havens to put money.

It will be interesting to see how much of the 300bn of loans will be taken up and at what interest rates. Even with a government guarantee the banks will only lend to viable businesses.

The debt levels will no doubt reach eye watering levels, but it will almost certainly cost the taxpayer less to pump in the support now in the hope that we can return to something close to normal productivity after the pandemic is over, than allowed businesses to go to the wall and then had to pay the bills of long-term unemployment for years.

Also we had very high debt levels after the war but managed to rebuild the housing stock, set up the NHS and public industries and have close to full employment for the next few decades and the debt was dealt with.

Debt levels became politicised by Osborne and Cameron as they had an opportunistic line of attack after Labour rescued the banking sector to keep credit lines around in 2008/09 and they could then paint Labour as being reckless with public money. Same as the "Tea Party" Republicans in the US attacking Obama for his rescue measures.

The politics of it had changed even before the pandemic as Boris and Cummings are not austerity hawks (supposedly the reason Sajid Javid was booted out was because he was not enthusiastic about Cummings spending plans for regenerating the north). And in the US, Trump has been driving up the US deficit ever since taking over from Obama, he has not cared about the budget balance.

Assuming Labour and the Democrats don't suddenly discover a taste for being austerity enthusiasts I don't think there will be the same political clamour for slashing everything. More likely to take the John Major/Ken Clarke approach to dealing with a 6 to 7 per cent budget deficit in the 1990s: restraint on spending combined with wide spreading, low-impact tax rises which virtually got rid of it in 5 years. You could do the same as that but over a decade. The aggressive austerity just slows the deficit reduction plan anyway by reducing your ability to grow.

One thing which helps governments in a time of economic uncertainty is that there is always a big demand for the relatively most safe form of investment. Even if everything is more risky, private sector assets are more risky than public sector assets. So whilst the risk of default from a government might be greater now than it was before, it may have become safer in relative terms than holding many other assets that have become exponentially more risky. The extra demand for government bonds then drives up the price of the bonds and hence the interest rate on them falls.

After the financial crisis, the countries that got in to trouble with debt unsustainability, because the interest on their borrowing skyrocketed, were the ones trapped in the Eurozone like Greece, Portugal. There it's an issue of cash flow, because of not having an independent central bank. In the UK, in a short-term cash flow crisis, the UK government can just meet its existing obligations to creditors by issuing new bonds that the Bank of England can buy up (pumping more cash in to circulation). You can't do that as a long term strategy as it will just ratchet up inflation, but the owner of UK government debt at least knows that in extremis the government can pay them back through that approach, and they will then reassess whether they want to hold any UK debt in the future. If you held Portuguese or Greek debt though, you had no such security as they don't have independent central banks and the ECB won't do that for individual countries. Hence although they had lower budget deficits than the UK did in the early 2010s, they paid much higher rates of interest on their borrowing than we did.

Quote ="sally cinnamon"In the UK, in a short-term cash flow crisis, the UK government can just meet its existing obligations to creditors by issuing new bonds that the Bank of England can buy up (pumping more cash in to circulation).'" Have they done that as well? I read something about a new £200 billion, but it might have been for existing bonds... if that makes any difference? Found it: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2162KT

Quote ="sally cinnamon"In the UK, in a short-term cash flow crisis, the UK government can just meet its existing obligations to creditors by issuing new bonds that the Bank of England can buy up (pumping more cash in to circulation).'" Have they done that as well? I read something about a new £200 billion, but it might have been for existing bonds... if that makes any difference? Found it: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN2162KT

I absolutely think the government is doing the right thing - and if that takes higher taxation rather than forced austerity surely that is a good thing. There has to be rules around the government-backed loans otherwise the otherwise the low-life's will simply borrow sufficient to clear enough debt to release them from their PG's and close the business and then pre-pack it and start again. Next they will simply undercut properly run businesses and ruin the market.

We have to minimise the job losses - that is crucial to the recovery - and good companies need to be supported through this - they will lead the charge of the recovery when it all calms down. Italy must be a worry - strict social measures have not reduced the death count the opposite has happened. Do we have to accept death on a significant scale is inevitable and move forward on that basis - was the herding strategy combining with social isolation of the old and vulnerable a better option?

Something needs to be done about the self employed but what? It is difficult to get monies to them especially if don't charge VAT - where do you access what is the right level of support.

Just think what the debt levels would have been if either party - especially Labour - had been well into the term. Then the debt levels would have truly eye-watering.