Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Then Starmer waits for them to calm down and meticulously tears into them using facts. 

Then the tories will find a picture of him putting milk in before the hot water while making a cup of tea and ruin his reputation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

"It is completely improper to politicise the crisis. We need to all pull together to send this virus packing"

**wheeyyyyyyyyyyyyy** from the baying crowds. 

Starmer makes a good, intelligent point ripping the Tories argument apart 

*shouting, boooooooo and/or laughing*

Business as usual....followed by huge numbers of MPs going down with the virus in a couple of weeks....

yeah, be interesting how dynamic changes with more people back in parliament...but still won't be rammed as they have to keep 2m apart, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Then the tories will find a picture of him putting milk in before the hot water while making a cup of tea and ruin his reputation. 

Starmer has the worlds best hair, he's impervious to these tactics with hair that good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

yeah, be interesting how dynamic changes with more people back in parliament...but still won't be rammed as they have to keep 2m apart, right?

JRM has today tabled a portion to scrap virtual voting, if approved tomorrow MPs may have to form long queues in order to obey social distancing rules when voting - despite the Lords planning a move online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

JRM has today tabled a portion to scrap virtual voting, if approved tomorrow MPs may have to form long queues in order to obey social distancing rules when voting - despite the Lords planning a move online.

But doesnt that require them all to be in the chamber for the debates? Has he calculated that more Labour MPs are older and at risk or something? Or does their huge majority mean they get a bigger percentage allowed in?

Edited by efcfanwirral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JoeyT said:

Do we have any economists amongst us?

I'm curious as to why we are going to be in such dire straits post this.

I've found myself with more money in my pocket even though I'm furloughed due to not physically being able to go out and spend it. I'd have thought this would be the case for lots of others too?

Given this surely people will have more money to splurge once this is over with and in turn kick start the economy again.

I'm not an economist but I work in finance for a bank so I have some insight.

There are a few major concerns one being that with jobs for many being in an uncertain position many people won't be spending what money they have in case they find themselves jobless in a few months times. There's also the issue of people being less confident in going out in shops with the virus still around. Another aspect is that whilst businesses can tick along currently being closed with the furlough scheme, when they start to reopen the support from the government will eventually stop. Consumer spend will be down as stated thus meaning these businesses would be taking in less revenue and with the government support no longer there will have to make people redundant. It goes round in a circle one causing parts of the other. The country needs spending to generate investment, which is partly austerity was a completely unnecessary political tool to use a decade ago and now we really need the government to keep on spending/investing to generate jobs which will get us through to the other side.

 

Whilst it's not now that we would see economic difficulties its later on when we started to reopen differing aspects of the economy and society. 

 

I think it's been mentioned but the government are funding the current support through borrowing from the BoE which is at or near 0% interest. One way of dealing with the economic fallout would be to push repayment of that debt back years till we see strong metrics then start to repayment it via instalments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, efcfanwirral said:

But doesnt that require them all to be in the chamber for the debates? 

Yes it does, that's how the government want to get MPs back. Some won't be able to due to shielding which is an issue along with the fact that under the above idea MPs would be queuing for miles. It's possible the government will lose that motion tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

JRM has today tabled a portion to scrap virtual voting, if approved tomorrow MPs may have to form long queues in order to obey social distancing rules when voting - despite the Lords planning a move online.

Nothing to do with the fact that the tories are likely to lose any votes due to their severe unpopularity within the house. 
 

Or is it just too modern for his Victorian mind. Would he be happier if they used messenger boys or maybe even carrier pigeon instead?

Edited by squirrelarmy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Nothing to do with the fact that the tories are likely to lose any votes due to their severe unpopularity within the house. 
 

Or is it just too modern for his Victorian mind. Would he be happier if they used messenger boys or maybe even carrier pigeon instead?

The Tories will still win key votes in the house, they have a majority of 80. It's probably more to do with Boris struggling at PMQs and the other aspect you mention.

 

Interestingly The Lords is developing a new secure online voting system for peers which is expected to be ready by the middle of the month. The Lords are even modernising!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Nothing to do with the fact that the tories are likely to lose any votes due to their severe unpopularity within the house. 
 

Or is it just too modern for his Victorian mind. Would he be happier if they used messenger boys or maybe even carrier pigeon instead?

I'm not sure on reasoning...maybe it's because the whips can't bully MPs in the corridors, or maybe it's because they want to send a message to the country to get back to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

So total deaths yesterday was 38,161 with an additional 113 deaths today that total should be 38,274, not 215 higher like they are saying now. Where have these 215 additional deaths come from, bearing in mind that it should cover all time periods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

I'm not sure on reasoning...maybe it's because the whips can't bully MPs in the corridors, or maybe it's because they want to send a message to the country to get back to work.

Old Rees-Mogg keeps saying it’s to set an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dotdash79 said:

 

 

 

 

So total deaths yesterday was 38,161 with an additional 113 deaths today that total should be 38,274, not 215 higher like they are saying now. Where have these 215 additional deaths come from, bearing in mind that it should cover all time periods.

Quote

A further change to the reporting process was introduced on 1 June 2020 and affected data from 24 May onwards. Deaths linked to cases identified through 'pillar 2' testing (see 'Total and daily UK cases' section on this page) are included as well as 'pillar 1' cases. All deaths before 24 May 2020 of people who tested positive through 'pillar 2' testing are included in the reported daily figure for 24 May 2020.

This change resulted in an additional 445 deaths being included (as at 1 June 2020).

Various changes in data reporting, a load of information on it here 

 

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/about

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I find this utterly mind boggling, surely you don’t jump from that height unless you’ve proper experience of something similar? Say at the very least from 50ft or 100ft?

Who makes a 200ft jump without really knowing what it’s like based purely on assumptions about what it might be like? 

 

mras59enoa251.jpg?width=875&auto=webp&s=70b449d8b47b1640034c0934184343602c54d7d7

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JoeyT said:

Do we have any economists amongst us?

I'm curious as to why we are going to be in such dire straits post this.

I've found myself with more money in my pocket even though I'm furloughed due to not physically being able to go out and spend it. I'd have thought this would be the case for lots of others too?

Given this surely people will have more money to splurge once this is over with and in turn kick start the economy again.

Yes sir.

It is precisely because you have more money in your pocket that the economy will take a hit. When people stop spending, businesses make less money, then they go under, then unemployment rises, tax receipts will be down and govt spending is ofc increased dramatically. So we’ll be in a position where we have low consumption, high unemployment, yooooooge public debt.

There is of course a lag for macro effects to result in businesses laying people off and an extra one now because of furlough, so right now it feels like nothing has changed but sadly it is coming.

Ultimately though, as my first economics tutor used to say ‘economics is like driving whilst using only the rear view mirror’. This is a unique situation so it’s hard to know what the full effects will be and how severe they will be. From some of the opinions I’ve read, a worst case scenario would be normal recessiony things- but consumption and confidence takes much longer time to recover because the economy doesnt fully open for long, unemployment rises even higher, investment decreases, and then if some medium term disruption to supply chains causes inflationary pressures at the same time then we’re potentially also looking down the barrel of a depression with some 70s style stagflation in the recovery. In the UK all of this could be exacerbated by brexit too.
 

Rosier forecasters say most of the lost consumption is just pent up consumption and these lean months will be followed by some frenzied bumper consumption once corona is done and that the govt will bridge the gap in between. In my experience as an observer, as a somewhat educated guess is that it’ll be something in between. Not a depression but a bit of a recession with some long lasting/permanent impact particularly in industries which have been very exposed (for sure airlines amongst others). But I’d qualify that opinion and say that its still very contingent on what the virus does and how governments respond in the next 18 months.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I don’t know if anyone on here has ever gone to Ikea in Wembley but hell is far more preferable.

You couldn’t pay me to go there now, let alone voluntarily join a four hour queue. 

Having been there agreed, though now thinking about it I quite fancy a plate of meatballs and chips! Plus jam obvs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, st dan said:

It’s about time they stopped selling these legally online - surely nobody is buying them for the intention they were made for (aren’t they used for whipping cream?!)

Genuine question - why is that then? It's fundamentally very safe. I don't like the mess and waste of the canisters but not much worse than plastic litter or cans strewn around. Get the noise irritates at the stone circle but most elsewhere hardly that bad? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...