And New York: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9Uf0SECcuc
New coronavirus in/from China
Moderator: Peak Moderation
-
Little John
So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
-
UndercoverElephant
- Posts: 13499
- Joined: 10 Mar 2008, 00:00
- Location: UK
Since when did you care about "our economy"?Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
Who is this "our"?
-
Little John
It's the economy we must all operate in, for better or worse. And, for most of us, it is for worse most of the time anyway. However, irrespective of any left/right considerations, there are certain material facts on the ground that exist.UndercoverElephant wrote:Since when did you care about "our economy"?Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
Who is this "our"?
1) We are massively overpopulated in terms of the carrying capacity of the UK.
2) We are not a resource based economy. If we were, whatever else happened to our economy would be offset by the fact we could at least feed and clothe ourselves. But, we are not. We are a capital based economy.
3) We consequently have to import over 50% of our food using that capital.
4) If yours/mine/ours/the (take your pick) economy is bust, we wont have the capital to pay for that food. At which point empty bellies will end any lock-down anyway.
Socialism or, indeed, any other ism will not fill empty bellies any better than capitalism if there is not the land to grow sufficient food. This is a problem of physics and biology not politics, in the first instance. Though, the politics and economics matter, in the longer term, of course.
If the economy is wrecked what will the reduced standard of living do to life expectancy ? It's possible that more people will have shorter lives because of the measures taken to stop covid19.Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
-
adam2
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10900
- Joined: 02 Jul 2007, 17:49
- Location: North Somerset, twinned with Atlantis
A lot of unused land could indeed be put into production.
I doubt that we could feed the whole nation thus, but we could feed a larger proportion on UK grown food than at present.
Land not fit for crops might suit sheep grazing.
Land liable to flooding can be used for cattle grazing.
Land unsuitable for the above, such as motorway verges could be used to grow trees for construction, paper making, and fire wood.
Some public parks and gardens could also grow trees as a crop, not too intensively, but on a smaller scale.
Planting an average of a few trees per acre would not spoil most parks, neither would harvesting 4% of these trees each year.
As an example, Richmond park in Southwest London has an area of about 2,500 acres. Planting 10,000 extra trees would alter but not in my view spoil the park. Cut a few hundred each year.
I doubt that we could feed the whole nation thus, but we could feed a larger proportion on UK grown food than at present.
Land not fit for crops might suit sheep grazing.
Land liable to flooding can be used for cattle grazing.
Land unsuitable for the above, such as motorway verges could be used to grow trees for construction, paper making, and fire wood.
Some public parks and gardens could also grow trees as a crop, not too intensively, but on a smaller scale.
Planting an average of a few trees per acre would not spoil most parks, neither would harvesting 4% of these trees each year.
As an example, Richmond park in Southwest London has an area of about 2,500 acres. Planting 10,000 extra trees would alter but not in my view spoil the park. Cut a few hundred each year.
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
-
Little John
ExactlyCatweazle wrote:If the economy is wrecked what will the reduced standard of living do to life expectancy ? It's possible that more people will have shorter lives because of the measures taken to stop covid19.Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
It's not that black-and-white.Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
The age profile is not totally in the 80s.
The median age is 50-something in Germany.
Also, the bug may be doing severe damage those who survive it.
-
Little John
The overwhelming evidence is of mortality rising steeply by age with the bulk of it being in the over 70s.Vortex2 wrote:It's not that black-and-white.Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
The age profile is not totally in the 80s.
The median age is 50-something in Germany.
Also, the bug may be doing severe damage those who survive it.
80+ years old - 14.8%
70-79 years old - 8.0%
60-69 years old - 3.6%
50-59 years old - 1.3%
40-49 years old - 0.4%
30-39 years old - 0.2%
20-29 years old - 0.2%
10-19 years old - 0.2%
0-9 years old - no fatalities
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... ographics/
I say all of the above in the context of being in my late fifties and whose wife is in her late fifties and as someone who works and whose wife works in very high risk environments for catching this virus and also in the context of having and whose wife also has co-morbitiies that raise our risk further still. In other words, I say all of this in the context of having a personal vested interest in any lock-down continuing.
But, this is not just about me and my wife and it is not just about you.
-
vtsnowedin
- Posts: 6595
- Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
- Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont
Well stated LJ and yes no easy questions to answer.Little John wrote:So, if we assume that the vast majority of people who die will be over 70 and a large portion of these will be over 80, then we may further assume that, for the majority of Covid-19 deaths, lives will have been shortened by around 0-10 years and I'd lay money a good sized sub portion of those will have been in the 0-1 year bracket.
In other words, I am saying that we appear to be destroying our economy in order to give some people only a few extra months or perhaps a few extra years than they were due anyway. It's an incredibly harsh thing to put it in those terms. But, there it is. There are many more lives that will be blighted for decades to come on the back of this. That is also an incredibly harsh thing.
There are no easy moral outcomes to this.
-
vtsnowedin
- Posts: 6595
- Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
- Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont
The unused "arable" land in the UK and even more so in Scotland is unused because land elsewhere (Canada , Australia ,the USA ) is more profitable and deliverers food at a lower unit cost even after transportation and other import cost are added in. You can grow wheat on your land if you need to but it will cost you seven to ten dollars a bushel while the current North American price isCatweazle wrote:I see so much potentially arable land unused in the UK, but it would need intensive labour to make it productive. We don't have the labour in the right places to do it. Add the uncertainties of the climate ( 20+ degrees today, frost predicted on Monday ) and we could be in trouble.
$5.56/Bu. And you can raise beef for $1.75 a pound live weight while North America sells it to you for $0.85.
It is a tough thing for a UK farmer finding a crop that is profitable against that competition but for the Joe six pack shopping for his family at Tesco the choice is clear.