This is what has always troubled me about total lockdown

[Makeitgoaway]

I don't understand how we get out of it.

Of course, it should reduce transmission while we're all locked down but unless the whole world has it under control, as soon as we start getting back to normal, it will all start again. As they're beginning to see in China.

Is this going to become a regular way of life, with lockdown annually or every few years?

And you're not taking into account the effect on the economy of letting COVID-19 spread unchecked through the population, killing off a projected 500k people and bringing the health service to its knees. It's not an "either/or" calculation. Everything is a shot in dark, best educated guess.

the virus is the least of my concerns now my vulnerable are self isolating.

What about other vulnerable people who aren't able to self isolate effectively as members of their household need to go out? What about people who need care? It's a large concern for a good many people, at the moment. You do you.

Thanks for the article, Bigchocfrenzy

And you're not taking into account the effect on the economy of letting COVID-19 spread unchecked through the population, killing off a projected 500k people

Its a stark reality, but killing off the 70+ generation would be an enormous economic advantage for the country.

The social care crisis that is heading our way would just disappear.

Wealth would be redistributed in a far more egalitarian manner meaning social inequality would be reduced.

I'm not suggesting for a minute that this is a desirable outcome, I'm very much playing devil's advocate here - but the facts are what they are.

On the plus side, this age group are also overwhelmingly right wing in their political views with a very high propensity to vote so I expect Boris will do everything to take care of them...

...and the NHS will be utterly crippled by the austerity measures that will have to be brought in to pay for the support the Chancellor has promised for the economy.

There isn't a good answer here.

No. There aren't any easy answers and we're not living in Logan's Run. So we'd best get on with the situation as it is now then, as best we all can, given that the government isn't on the phone to you for your advice.

No but a lot of people are on forums .... it's public opinion that sways how long lockdown lasts

given that the government isn't on the phone to you for your advice

The Government should be 'on the phone' to all of us for 'advice'

Its how healthy democracy works.

A lot of your posts have a really troubling undertone of just accepting policy without question.

We all need to question, challenge, hold our leaders to account.

x post there @StirCrazed

A lot of your posts have a really troubling undertone of just accepting policy without question.

While your posts have the troubling undertone that a considerable number of the population should just be allowed to die.

If the government is going to try nudging me, I will bloody well nudge back

It's a sad state of affairs when we are so accepting of what has been a rather lacklustre and poor national response just because, what, the government knows best?

Going back to your earlier point about other people and their vulnerable. As you point out, I have no influence over national policy so I will look after my own. If I did have influence, we would be throwing it at the best of a poor choice of options that we are now stuck with, and making as good provision as possible for all vulnerable people to be able to self isolate for the two years this is going to take (estimate only but let's plan long term and not kid ourselves it's 12 weeks). Big reorganization of many processes necessary. Massive testing. Nothing will provide absolute security, but then neither will a half arsed lockdown. Hey, I don't get to influence that though so I keep mine safe. You do you.

This thread is really very odd. There’s a handful of posters who keep saying lockdown will send us into a 50-100 year depression and many people will die as a consequence of austerity measures.

The implication seeming to be that if we don’t have a lockdown and allow 250,000-500,000 people to die without medical care, the economy would have been mostly fine as we’d all just go out and keep the economy going by eating Byron burgers and going to the cinema, blithely ignoring bodies piling up in their hundreds of thousands in a humanitarian catastrophe. And assuming that isn’t go to leave thousands of care and health workers with PTSD and have a massive economic impact.

There is no way of having the global economy we had before, whatever path we take. The economy we have in the future will be different, and there’s an interesting conversation to be had about how we learn from this and build an economy that is more prepared for future pandemics and environmental events. What is happening to the economy now was always going to happen because we weren’t keeping pace with the challenges of a globalised world.

As for austerity, that’s a political decision. It is not an inevitable consequence of economic events that we must introduce austerity measures. And even if we do introduce austerity measures, it is a choice to disproportionately place those measures on to the most vulnerable, causing mortality rates to rise. These are social and political choices, not an economic inevitability.

There are many different trajectories the future economy could take, and no doubt a lot of interesting debate about how to do that, but I don’t see any of that on this thread, just a lot of vague economic threats with no actual knowledge.

Well said.

a considerable number of the population should just be allowed to die

All of the population is going to die.

Perhaps of Coronavirus, perhaps of something else, but none of us get out alive.

How very trite. Read the excellent post that Nameofchanges just made. There is no either/or here. It's not an option to do nothing.

Or it is, technically, but it won't necessarily be any better for the economy.

The economy is going to be utterly ruined after this.

I would love for @Nameofchanges to be correct, but sadly its cloud cuckoo land. No austerity measures needed after a tripling in government borrowing? How exactly do you see that working?

It is going to be ok.
Let's not allow fear to take over .There will be light @ the end of the tunnel.
There is one unfailing solution to all problems & that is PRAYER . God never fails. He knows how all this is going to end. Let's continue to pray to God, he will answer our prayers.

It is going to be ok.

Is it? Have you told that to the over a thousand people that have died in the UK, and their families,? Or yo the many thousands who have died worldwide?

I'm thinking, if there's a God he wouldnt allow this to happen. At the very least he would keep the doctors and nurses safe.

I agree with Nameofchanges. "Austerity" was a policy doctrine, held dogmatically by last decade's government despite the opinions of economists and the facts from other countries. It comes about from the false idea that the finances of the nation can be treated like the finances of a household; the reality is they are quite different.

God knows best.

@Jesusisking the vast majority of human history would suggest otherwise.

@Ereshkigalangcleg historically, unchecked epidemics can be extremely politically and economically beneficial. The economist had a very interesting article about it last year, o can’t remember the exact title but I think it had the words “reducing inequality” in it. Interesting read if you can find it.

That depends what you count as "beneficial" doesn't it? Looking back with hindsight its easy to say that. Not so much if you and your family die of the plague or cholera.

We cannot “defeat” this, it is in almost every country around the world,“

The absolute tragedy is that if everyone had a reacted quickly and in unison in Jan/Feb we actually had a real chance of eradicating the disease. We might have had to close down like we are now and even for 3 months but we might actully have eradicated it before it got properly started. But everyone was too worried about the economy then.as well. Also people.would.just have been saying it wasn't worth it as the numbers dying would have been very small if any then

Now we are stuck with similar measures for much much less gain