[frearsghost]

DEATH, on 30 March 2020 - 11:13 PM, said:

Sorry but no, he’s being deliberately provocative, probably to boost his own ratings on the next LBC show

Yes. I too have asked why flights from these countries are still arriving and passengers allowed to enter the country without so much as taking their temperatures. Not provocative at all just sensible observations and, as usual, on the button.

[clarevoyant.]

frearsghost, on 31 March 2020 - 09:33 AM, said:

No country could have been prepared for the pandemic. The country has gone into debt - rightly so - to save lives as will most countries on the planet. You don't spend vast sums of money to prepare for something that happens once every one hundred years. If you did, most of the equipment and practices would be outdated by the time you came to use them. It's a bit like say we must build one thousand battleships and increase the army to one million combatants just in case there's another world war. That would be economic suicide. The pandemic deserves funding, the funding of infrastructure in normal times still requires prudent management. The majority of voters recognise this and have elected, what appears to be, a popular Prime Minister at the head of a popular government.

This frightful business is not an excuse to politicise the pandemic as an excuse to bolster Jeremy Corbyn economics. Look at Venezuela.

The health service being classed has one of the 'Critical Industries' their procurements should be done through a rigorously policed supply chain. Before a company obtains what will be a lucrative place within this supply chain they should have proven their ability to, a/ manufacture to required standard at defined quantities b/ maintain and store predetermined stock levels c/ to have proven they have the capability to increase production to attain a predetermined level.

In setting up these contracts someones figures or supplier selection have gone hopelessly wrong.

[fishini]

frearsghost, on 31 March 2020 - 09:33 AM, said:

No country could have been prepared for the pandemic. The country has gone into debt - rightly so - to save lives as will most countries on the planet. You don't spend vast sums of money to prepare for something that happens once every one hundred years. If you did, most of the equipment and practices would be outdated by the time you came to use them. It's a bit like say we must build one thousand battleships and increase the army to one million combatants just in case there's another world war. That would be economic suicide. The pandemic deserves funding, the funding of infrastructure in normal times still requires prudent management. The majority of voters recognise this and have elected, what appears to be, a popular Prime Minister at the head of a popular government.

This frightful business is not an excuse to politicise the pandemic as an excuse to bolster Jeremy Corbyn economics. Look at Venezuela.

Free market philosophy would have totally failed so the socialist way had to be adopted. This must really irk the blond lier and his obnoxious side kick Cummings to

[isleaiw1]

fishini, on 31 March 2020 - 11:19 AM, said:

Free market philosophy would have totally failed so the socialist way had to be adopted. This must really irk the blond lier and his obnoxious side kick Cummings to

socialist? or fascist / communist? its a thin line between the two it seems as I would say state control of all decisions is the least socialist thing ever!

[Wooden Spoon]

calvin plummers socks said:

1585640389[/url]' post='1513062']
May be a bit more pressure on the likes of Amazon, Uber and Starbucks to pay their share (hopefully)

Agree with you there 100%.




I read somewhere that if all the corporate tax loopholes, offshore accounts, etc were closed, it would match total PAYE contributions.

[Wooden Spoon]

The Earl of Chesterfield said:

1585641234[/url]' post='1513063']
Let's call it what it is - nationalisation.

A collection of characters who've spent their lives not just opposing government intervention but pursuing a 'wild west' style free for all had no choice other than to intervene. On a scale not seen probably since the worldwide financial crash and definitely World War 2.

Even though they're now describing it as 'partnerships'.

As for your observation of a post outbreak Britain let's remember what happened in 1945, when a war winning Churchill was rejected by an electorate voting FOR the NHS, FOR a welfare state worth the name and FOR centrally controlled public services. Funded by the people for the people.

Let's see if those standing outside their homes to 'clap a carer' are prepared to turn those applause into taxes.

Then let's see if those joining in outside Number Ten for the PR stunt are prepared to implement those taxes fairly.

PS: raiding those offshore havens where self appointed patriots stash their cash would be an obvious start...

You know, those parallels might just be the best way forward for economic recovery, because it will have to be a long hard slog to pay off the loans and get things back to where they are. Could it be a seismic shift in Tory party policies?




Interesting that a maverick Tory leader has had to do this. It actually makes me hopeful that Thatcherism “no such thing as society” could be consigned to the history books

[Westbars Spireite]

isleaiw1, on 31 March 2020 - 11:23 AM, said:

socialist? or fascist / communist? its a thin line between the two it seems as I would say state control of all decisions is the least socialist thing ever!

Or most if go round the other way.

[frearsghost]

DEATH, on 31 March 2020 - 11:56 AM, said:

You know, those parallels might just be the best way forward for economic recovery, because it will have to be a long hard slog to pay off the loans and get things back to where they are. Could it be a seismic shift in Tory party policies?




Interesting that a maverick Tory leader has had to do this. It actually makes me hopeful that Thatcherism “no such thing as society” could be consigned to the history books

As most of the world is in the same boat, don't discount the possibility that these loans could be written off.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

frearsghost, on 31 March 2020 - 09:33 AM, said:

No country could have been prepared for the pandemic. The country has gone into debt - rightly so - to save lives as will most countries on the planet. You don't spend vast sums of money to prepare for something that happens once every one hundred years. If you did, most of the equipment and practices would be outdated by the time you came to use them. It's a bit like say we must build one thousand battleships and increase the army to one million combatants just in case there's another world war. That would be economic suicide. The pandemic deserves funding, the funding of infrastructure in normal times still requires prudent management. The majority of voters recognise this and have elected, what appears to be, a popular Prime Minister at the head of a popular government.

This frightful business is not an excuse to politicise the pandemic as an excuse to bolster Jeremy Corbyn economics. Look at Venezuela.

Ayup, John.

Hope you and yours' are well.

I think everyone agrees with your initial observation. And as our friend 'isleaiw1' quite rightly points out it'd be unrealistic to store millions of PPE items for year after year after year. However this pandemic's been around for months; so why weren't our government buying up gear instead of, say, undermining the BBC? Why did they snub opportunities to procure ventilators? Then it's more than three weeks since Johnson declared vital protection had been stockpiled, his representatives have repeatedly played down shortages and only this Sunday one of them trumpeted how many are supposedly being delivered.

Yet today as yesterday the responsible media's still full of medical staff insisting they've none to work with.

This is concerning, on a number of levels. Firstly the fact frontline medics are essentially being sent into battle without armour (can you remember how that was 'politicised' by Cameron and Co in 2010?), then secondly the fact we're being misled. By politicians with plenty of previous in that department. For the most part the British people have been amazing - however what happens if the trust you claim deteriorates? If they start to question, possibly even ignore official advice as a result?

Regardless of pathetic accusations that observers like myself are somehow happy to see such scenarios my old man falls into the highest of high risk categories. So any breakdown of Covid protocols could hit very close to home.

I also note that whilst you say the crisis is 'no excuse to bolster Jeremy Corbyn economics' - the very economics that saved society in 2008 and are now being replicated by Sunak - there's not a word to condemn Farage's intervention. An intervention that not only encourages folk to challenge the lockdown but accuses our police men and women of abusing their powers.

Infact exactly the kinda stuff that'd have his followers squealing treachery had they been made by the Corbyn your apparently 'non' political post references.

PS: I'll see your Venezuela and raise you Trump's free market free for all America...

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

DEATH, on 30 March 2020 - 11:19 PM, said:

Well, this crisis will be remembered for a long time. Shops that charged £10 for bog roll, Mike Ashley asking his staff to work. And if the tories do not fairly, and evenly distribute the burden of this borrowing which will have to be paid back, then this will also be remembered for a long long time.

Add the despicable Tim Martin to that, too.

The bloke who wanted to stay open after the lockdown, refused to pay self isolating staff and tells them to get a job at Tesco when they're skint.

It'll be a long time before I'll do a 'Spoons again.

By the way, I see supermarkets are reporting March as their best ever month. Ever. I'd like to see those profits turned into some sort of gesture, freebies for the vulnerable, NHS workers and foodbank donations, for example.

[Mr Mercury]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 31 March 2020 - 02:57 PM, said:

Add the despicable Tim Martin to that, too.

The bloke who wanted to stay open after the lockdown, refused to pay self isolating staff and tells them to get a job at Tesco when they're skint.

It'll be a long time before I'll do a 'Spoons again.

By the way, I see supermarkets are reporting March as their best ever month. Ever. I'd like to see those profits turned into some sort of gesture, freebies for the vulnerable, NHS workers and foodbank donations, for example.

I stand to be corrected but I think Morrisons are donating £10m worth of food to food banks.

[calvin plummers socks]

The horrendous Toby Young sparked an interesting debate on Twitter (he’s basically sh stirring of course) but suggested that the nation returns to normal on 14 April which would save billions at a cost of a few elderly lives - on the basis that the financial turmoil which will follow all this and the burden on most people’s and business lives will cause massive increase in suicide rate etc

[Mr Mercury]

calvin plummers socks, on 31 March 2020 - 03:23 PM, said:

The horrendous Toby Young sparked an interesting debate on Twitter (he’s basically sh stirring of course) but suggested that the nation returns to normal on 14 April which would save billions at a cost of a few elderly lives - on the basis that the financial turmoil which will follow all this and the burden on most people’s and business lives will cause massive increase in suicide rate etc

Lord Sumption, a leading juror, or something like that, said very similar on Radio 4 earlier. The cure, in the long run, is going to cost far more in lives, livelihoods, debt, depression, economics, etc etc than the disease will. Something for debate whether you agree with him or not. Understandable points if you're one of those who'll suffer in the long run, but the words of a lunatic if one of your own, god forbid, is a victim.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

I'd ask anyone advocating this filth a very simple question: which members of your family are you prepared to sacrifice? Son? Daughter? Wife or husband? Mother or father? Grandkids who've hardly even tasted life (a twelve year old joined the list of victims this weekend)?

And what about, say, war vets who helped deliver us from evil - are they expendable so some City yuppie can get his bonus?

I'd say Young, the Hitchens saying summat similar this morning, Trump, Cummins and anyone else putting wealth before health ought to be made to answer...

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 31 March 2020 - 05:19 PM, said:

I'd ask anyone advocating this filth a very simple question: which members of your family are you prepared to sacrifice? Son? Daughter? Wife or husband? Mother or father? Grandkids who've hardly even tasted life (a twelve year old joined the list of victims this weekend)?

And what about, say, war vets who helped deliver us from evil - are they expendable so some City yuppie can get his bonus?

I'd say Young, the Hitchens saying summat similar this morning, Trump, Cummins and anyone else putting wealth before health ought to be made to answer...

Edit: another thought occurs. What about the NHS staff overwhelmed by this? What about their physical and mental health? What about all those denied treatment for life ending illnesses because the wards are full of Covid cases? What about the impact on social infrastructure? On other public services?

Attention seeking at it's sickening worst.

[spireiterob]

Why did Gove lie about this regarding testing earlier? They can't help themselves.

https://www.itv.com/...it-ingredients/

[joe]

The Earl of Chesterfield, on 31 March 2020 - 02:44 PM, said:

Ayup, John.

Hope you and yours' are well.

I think everyone agrees with your initial observation. And as our friend 'isleaiw1' quite rightly points out it'd be unrealistic to store millions of PPE items for year after year after year. However this pandemic's been around for months; so why weren't our government buying up gear instead of, say, undermining the BBC? Why did they snub opportunities to procure ventilators? Then it's more than three weeks since Johnson declared vital protection had been stockpiled, his representatives have repeatedly played down shortages and only this Sunday one of them trumpeted how many are supposedly being delivered.

Yet today as yesterday the responsible media's still full of medical staff insisting they've none to work with.

This is concerning, on a number of levels. Firstly the fact frontline medics are essentially being sent into battle without armour (can you remember how that was 'politicised' by Cameron and Co in 2010?), then secondly the fact we're being misled. By politicians with plenty of previous in that department. For the most part the British people have been amazing - however what happens if the trust you claim deteriorates? If they start to question, possibly even ignore official advice as a result?

Regardless of pathetic accusations that observers like myself are somehow happy to see such scenarios my old man falls into the highest of high risk categories. So any breakdown of Covid protocols could hit very close to home.

I also note that whilst you say the crisis is 'no excuse to bolster Jeremy Corbyn economics' - the very economics that saved society in 2008 and are now being replicated by Sunak - there's not a word to condemn Farage's intervention. An intervention that not only encourages folk to challenge the lockdown but accuses our police men and women of abusing their powers.

Infact exactly the kinda stuff that'd have his followers squealing treachery had they been made by the Corbyn your apparently 'non' political post references.

PS: I'll see your Venezuela and raise you Trump's free market free for all America...

It wouldn't be right to buy 7 years worth of PPE same as you don't go and buy 60 MRI machines all at once. The NHS in the past was expert at planning and spreading the cost. What they should have done is stocking on an annual basis so that after 7 years they could refresh their stock. The Tory government has deliberately held the NHS back because there is so much profit in private medicine.

[Wooden Spoon]

joe said:

1585685760[/url]' post='1513134']
It wouldn't be right to buy 7 years worth of PPE same as you don't go and buy 60 MRI machines all at once. The NHS in the past was expert at planning and spreading the cost. What they should have done is stocking on an annual basis so that after 7 years they could refresh their stock. The Tory government has deliberately held the NHS back because there is so much profit in private medicine.

I’d imagine that physicians would prefer to have thing they need right now, rather than stuff they might need in 7 years time. It’s all well and good in hindsight, but in normal times budgets have to be managed to get the most out of them.



Store loads of P.P.E that might be used, or treat 1 cancer patient who definitely needs it. Where would you put the money?

[clarevoyant.]

joe, on 31 March 2020 - 08:16 PM, said:

It wouldn't be right to buy 7 years worth of PPE same as you don't go and buy 60 MRI machines all at once. The NHS in the past was expert at planning and spreading the cost. What they should have done is stocking on an annual basis so that after 7 years they could refresh their stock. The Tory government has deliberately held the NHS back because there is so much profit in private medicine.

Reread post 522

[Misnomer]

Mr Mercury, on 30 March 2020 - 02:44 PM, said:

And that's the whole point. You should judge people today, not for actions of years gone by.

That's what Nazi war criminals said...