Is the economy lives indeed?

[Shehz21]

I keep hearing "Lives before the economy" and the reply back to this is "The economy is lives".

Personally my situation is:
My DH lost his job back in March and we are not eligible for UC. He only recently(3 weeks ago)found another job. We were struggling financially, mentally and our marriage took a big blow due to those 6 months.
I used to do some freelancing from home while looking after our toddler and that industry literally died due to Covid. I have always been very anti lockdown, seeing only the negatives due to the amount of stress that we had to go through due to the lockdown, in that affected us to a level where I considered dying rather than living in a state of constant stress. But again this has been due to my very personal situation.
Anyways this just makes me think is the economy indeed not lives? Or maybe I am missing something.
Sorry if this all seems a bit like a confused woman rambling as I am very close to a mental breakdown.

There's too much emphasis on quantity of life and not quality of life.

I am inclined to agree with you @Olmec8.

Quite unfortunate...

OP, it’s an immensely difficult situation all round.

However I agree with you in that I believe that the costs of lockdown are astronomical and the full extent of that won’t be fully felt for ages. Lockdowns aren’t the ‘easy’ option but they are a ‘simple’ option for governments and I feel they’ve been entered into far too lightly.

I agree with you and you are not alone in feeling the way you do.

I tried hard to be on board with the first lockdown in March but got dealt blow after blow and changed my mind pretty sharpish.

I was made redundant (though the reasons for it were not Covid related) and there is literally nothing for me round here at the moment. Age is also against me, at 54. My elderly, increasingly frail and shielding parents who live a three hour drive away had several serious health crises and were in and out of hospital. Luckily they made it through lockdown and I was able to see them again but I really feared that that wasn't going to be the case.

So, I am now very anti-lockdown. Lockdowns are a very blunt tool. They mess with people's lives and livelihoods and trash the economy. No matter what the reasons, I cannot be supportive of that.

OP the whole thing is total bollocks. Saving lives is not the priority for me, I'd rather be dead than live a shit life - so why people bang on about lockdown being the number one priority is beyond me. Surely there could have been some kind of balance, like a halfway house lockdown - like the last few months couldn't they have turned the tap on and off every couple of weeks?

Eat out to help out I mean ffs- it's all ridiculous

OP I totally agree with you and am very sorry you find yourself in this situation. I hope things improve.

Having lived through several losses, I’d save lives every time where we can. Adults/children are losing their parents, spouses, friends etc or having to watch loved ones get taken to hospital alone. No one knows how a body will react so herd immunity and no lockdown would be an awful route to go down.

I'd rather be dead than live a shit life It's easy to say that when there isn't a large probability that you will actually lose your life. I'd have said the same as you. But when it was presented that a) I had a non-trivial probability of becoming seriously ill/dying and b) that I would be a low priority for treatment, I found to my surprise that I did care quite a bit.

I think lockdown is the red herring here. We should have had much better ways in combatting this, testing, quick returns, expansion of hospitals, key worker job expansion, support to really make schools safe...prevention better than cure, whatever it takes.

This government does not plan ahead. They could have invested so much more into the above and less in furlough and picking up the economy, now and overtime.
Public services were on their knees before this with so many cuts, police, schools, NHS, army, that we have no reserves to draw on.

I don't want any of my family and friends to lose their lives, given a really harsh choice, yes I would rather me and my family be in poverty and alive, than not at all.

I agree with you OP. People saying saving lives is more important than the economy don’t realise that they are two sides of the same coin. How the hell will we pay for the NHS and the rising unemployment in the years to come?

I just don’t understand why we can’t shield the elderly and the vulnerable whilst those of us who are low risk continue to keep the economy going so we can pay to protect those who are vulnerable. The Barrington lot just keep being called out as a bunch of nutters but I don’t know why a more serious conversation is being had about this.

The economy and lives are heavily interlinked. You can't have a strong economy without an healthy population.

You can't have a strong economy without an healthy population.

The opposite is also true. The impact of lockdowns has probably already damaged the NHS irrevocably,

I think lockdown is the red herring here. We should have had much better ways in combatting this

I agree with this particular point. The biggest tragedy of all is that one lockdown has already been wasted and this second one will almost certainly go the same way.

Every second of lockdown should be seen as precious time to put systems in place to avoid having to do it again. It should be the last resort of last resorts. I think history will judge the immediate post lockdown period as the biggest failing.

@TheKeatingFive so true. My heart sank in May after weeks of sacrifice by the public that the government came up with about three slides and the 5 stages (which are nowhere to be seen now). They had all that time and they did absolutely nothing but balls it up.

I don't really agree with this concept of 'think of the economy'. If loads of people come down with covid at the same time the economy will break down anyway. we went through two world wars and built the NHS after the last one. I think a lot of it is scare tactics from rich business owners who may lose a few million.

I think a lot of it is scare tactics from rich business owners who may lose a few million.

You are staggeringly naive if you think the economy tanking will do anything other than hit the poor the hardest.

Rainy910 - the Barrington declaration wouldn't work now with so many cases. It would only work by implementing it when cases were low.

No I don't think Im I'm staggeringly naive. I think I have a different view point from yours. The Poor are always hit the hardest in everything. That's nothing new. But we still keep voting in the same lot who never change their policies to protect them.

No I don't think Im I'm staggeringly naive

But you apparently haven’t noticed the millions that have already lost their jobs and are panicking about how to keep a roof over their heads? They’re not rich business owners, now are they?

Or thought about what plummeting tax receipts from this year will do to the NHS? Education? Social care?

The "economy" is a measure of economic, i.e.: productive output, i.e.: people's work.

If the "economy" tanks, then people have stopped being productive- that's what it means. The economy slowing down means that the exchange of goods and services has decreased. If people do less, or exchange less goods and services, then the people who provide those goods and services don't get paid. Which means they in turn don't have money to pay their mortgage/but groceries/etc etc.

As @TheKeatingFive said, economic slowdown hits the poorest the hardest every time.

I'll be honest - I'm working class and no I don't know anyone who has lost their job through covid. I also live next door to a huge shopping centre. And before this second lockdown the roads and ships were gridlocked. No I'm not 'naive' enough to think that no one had lost their jobs but I can only go on my experience. At work we are recruiting more than ever. I don't think this is not going to touch us - of course it is but I think that many people are getting scared thinking we are going to be paying hundreds more a month in tax and the lights will go out. They won't.

I think both statements are true and the tricky bit here is to balance the direct effects on lives due to the illness and the effects on lives due to the restrictions.
And so we will have rules and ever changing guidance, and maybe further lockdowns till the health issue generated by covid fizzles out, either by a vaccine or treatment or the population gaining immunity.

Anecdotal I know, but a close relative committed suicide some years ago due to longterm unemployment. He was made redundant in his mid-fifties, having worked in one of those careers which had gradually become obsolete, and sunk into deep depression. Again I know its anecdotal, but its always stuck with me. We're safe enough at the moment, but the thought of real mass unemployment scares me for others.

And yes, its the poor who will be screwed. If you're an educated professional you probably have assets, a financial cushion, relatively affluent parents who can help out a bit, a working partner who is still bringing home a professional income, skills which mean you can hope for re-employment twelve months down the line.

I completely agree Mushmonster. Now I'm no expert on the economy but I do know the the uk economy surged by 7.4% in the last quarter, after tanking in the first quarter. That is what is going to happen. It will rise and fall while we work though this pandemic. I don't but this our children and children's children will suffer for years to come.