When will this shit end?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

10 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Yes, they did...but what do you do...keep them locked up and isolated for months on end? That idea was looked at here and the modellers predicted it would have been a disaster, which is why we had a quick change of plan. Anyway, compare Sweden to Denmark or Norway...more deaths, no economic benefit.

But there is now evidence there was an economic benefit. You can’t really take one off snapshots of GDP as a guide, the fuller picture is now starting to emerge.

[Ozanne]

3 minutes ago, FestivalJamie said:

It’s probably too early to compare any countries, given the pandemic isn’t over yet.

But so far, the UKs death rate isn’t exactly a positive outcome, and neither is Sweden’s or Italy’s or Spain’s or Belgium's when we compare these countries to a lot of other countries.

The main difference being that the UK, Sweden and arguably Belgium all got hit with adequate warning. Italy were hit with absolutely no warning whatsoever but took as efficient action as they can, and since suppressing the virus their rates remain low. The outcome in Italy was unavoidable. Spain was hit in pretty quick succession, also an arguably unavoidable outcome.

In the UK we saw what was happening in Italy, we saw what was happening in Spain. As soon as spain went into lockdown, we should have immediately closed the borders and followed suit to save lives. But instead we waited and waited and waited until there was no other option but lockdown and look at the devastating outcome of our first wave. The reason the economy is so crippled is because we have had to all endure lockdown for so long. If we had gone into lockdown one week or two weeks earlier, then thousands less people would have died and the country would have been to able to open up a lot sooner.

Oh yes I agree with your points, you are right. I just thought I’d heard before it was too early to compare to other countries, just wanted to check.

[Cream Soda]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

doesn't seem to have been compared to its neighbours.

Sweden did have restrictions etc., social distancing, closed high schools, but didnt close bars/restaurants/gyms etc.

I don't see how there can't not be an economic benefit to having businesses open as opposed to paying for everyone to be on furlough?

The difference with us and Sweden is they chose a path and went with it, whether you agree with that or not that's the risk they took.  Whereas we lingered around for weeks longer than we should have but then eventually shut down anyway.  Absolute shambles.

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

But there is now evidence there was an economic benefit. You can’t really take one off snapshots of GDP as a guide, the fuller picture is now starting to emerge.

but Norway and Denmark doing pretty well too...and a lot less dead people to bury.

[steviewevie]

Just now, Cream Soda said:

I don't see how there can't not be an economic benefit to having businesses open as opposed to paying for everyone to be on furlough?

The difference with us and Sweden is they chose a path and went with it, whether you agree with that or not that's the risk they took.  Whereas we lingered around for weeks longer than we should have but then eventually shut down anyway.  Absolute shambles.

Those businesses would have less customers...and get less government support?

Didn't Bojo want to keep pubs open here but told people not to go to them...and the pubs were like what the fuck?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

but Norway and Denmark doing pretty well too...and a lot less dead people to bury.

I was simply responding to your comment that they've had no economic benefit which isn’t true. Their economy is now described as the ‘least worst’ in Europe.

[Cream Soda]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

Those businesses would have less customers...and get less government support?

Didn't Bojo want to keep pubs open here but told people not to go to them...and the pubs were like what the fuck?

Well yeah, is that how it happened in Sweden though?  Or did they pretty much carry on as normal?  

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Cream Soda said:

I don't see how there can't not be an economic benefit to having businesses open as opposed to paying for everyone to be on furlough?

The difference with us and Sweden is they chose a path and went with it, whether you agree with that or not that's the risk they took.  Whereas we lingered around for weeks longer than we should have but then eventually shut down anyway.  Absolute shambles.

Sweden dithered too...they slowly brought in more restrictions...

But but but, to be fair...all countries were kind of trying to find best way through this..and hopefully we'll know better for next time.

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Cream Soda said:

Well yeah, is that how it happened in Sweden though?  Or did they pretty much carry on as normal?  

they brought in social distance rules for pubs and restaurants. They certainly didn't carry on as normal.

[Crazyfool01]

7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Oh yes I agree with your points, you are right. I just thought I’d heard before it was too early to compare to other countries, just wanted to check.

Yep I wonder where u heard that  I got the slightly sancastic tone  

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

If you look into it Sweden have provided some financial intervention, but as you’d expect relatively speaking nowhere near as much as the U.K.

The amount of trillions you’ve had to pump into your economy to keep it going obviously has to be considered alongside how well your economy is actually doing.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, steviewevie said:

they brought in social distance rules for pubs and restaurants. They certainly didn't carry on as normal.

Sort of what we have now then ? If people followed the rules ? 

[steviewevie]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-23/sweden-s-coronavirus-approach-doesn-t-pay-off-for-the-economy

[steviewevie]

Just now, crazyfool1 said:

Sort of what we have now then ? If people followed the rules ? 

yes, sort of...

[Cream Soda]

Just now, steviewevie said:

they brought in social distance rules for pubs and restaurants. They certainly didn't carry on as normal.

You would still think that having something coming into the economy would be preferable to nothing (and paying out furlough etc) , even if there were fewer customers.  (From a purely economic point of view). I don't see how that can't be beneficial for the economy but I am no economist.

[steviewevie]

Just now, Cream Soda said:

You would still think that having something coming into the economy would be preferable to nothing (and paying out furlough etc) , even if there were fewer customers.  (From a purely economic point of view). I don't see how that can't be beneficial for the economy but I am no economist.

I guess depends on how you look at it....longer restrictions, more deaths like in Sweden vs shorter lockdown and less deaths as in Denmark. Have to see which is better for the economy, but I know where I'd rather be living.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-23/sweden-s-coronavirus-approach-doesn-t-pay-off-for-the-economy

Which is in contradiction to this:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/markets.businessinsider.com/amp/news/sweden-coronavirus-economy-relaxed-lockdown-stronger-rest-of-europe-2020-7-1029415101

[steviewevie]

Just now, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Which is in contradiction to this:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/markets.businessinsider.com/amp/news/sweden-coronavirus-economy-relaxed-lockdown-stronger-rest-of-europe-2020-7-1029415101

isn't the businessinsider one based on forecasts?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

4 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

isn't the businessinsider one based on forecasts?

It’s based on actual growth in the first part of the year and a forecast that they’ll fair least worst in the second half. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

17 minutes ago, Cream Soda said:

You would still think that having something coming into the economy would be preferable to nothing (and paying out furlough etc) , even if there were fewer customers.  (From a purely economic point of view). I don't see how that can't be beneficial for the economy but I am no economist.

The is essentially the case. If two economies shrink by 10% in the same period, but it cost one of them a significant amount more in financial intervention to achieve the same result, obviously this needs to be considered.

The U.K. was predicted to be hit hardest by Covid because we’re a service led economy, 70% of our GDP is from the service industry, so pandemic = massive economic hit. It’s an extreme example but if you look at a country like NZ the biggest contributors to their economy are meat and dairy, things that would’ve been in demand during a pandemic, not massive decline.

It stands to reason if you don’t shutter businesses and simultaneously spend billions/trillions on financial interventions then your economy will be better off on a like for like basis, but there are myriad other things to factor in.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[steviewevie]

BoJo persuading Scotland they're better off being governed by him and his weirdo mates.

[jparx]

Pahaha what the fuck are LUFC playing at? Telling people to celebrate at home them having an open top bus?! Christ, what a low rent thing to do.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

Just now, jparx said:

Pahaha what the fuck are LUFC playing at? Telling people to celebrate at home them having an open top bus?! Christ, what a low rent thing to do.

The reasoning was it would help disperse the crowd, as they’d obviously go home once that happened 😏

[jparx]

Just now, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

The reasoning was it would help disperse the crowd, as they’d obviously go home once that happened 😏

Unbelievable incompetence. 

[squirrelarmy]

23 minutes ago, jparx said:

Pahaha what the fuck are LUFC playing at? Telling people to celebrate at home them having an open top bus?! Christ, what a low rent thing to do.

 

21 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

The reasoning was it would help disperse the crowd, as they’d obviously go home once that happened 😏

It worked though as planned. The fans were always going to gather. There had already been two very large gatherings, once when we secured promotion and another when we secured the title. 
 

Those spontaneous gatherings didn’t have an end point. The fans gathered and just kept partying. 
 

As fans we were told to stay away from Elland Road this week and the vast majority did. A lot did go there, the team came out, showed the trophy and then the crowd left. There wasn’t the widespread littering and carnage seen last week.

 I don’t think they could have handled it any other way. 

Edited July 23, 2020 by squirrelarmy