HomeGovernmentCOVID-19 shutdown?


COVID-19 shutdown? — 2 Comments

  1. There seems to be a parallel between the “Climate Change” scam and the response to the coronavirus — the actual data (warts & all) is not too bad; it is the models which predict that it is all going to spiral out of control.

    I don’t know the numbers for the UK. In the US, where 7,800 people die every day, the flu is only the 8th largest cause of death — and this virus is so far about 2 orders of magnitude less than the flu. (Ah! But the virus is going to expand exponentially and we are all going to die, their models say).

    We know we should be very careful of the “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” fallacy. Has South Korea’s testing regime really made that much of a difference? So South Korea tests 200,000 people (out of a population of 52,000,000) — what do they do with the people who test positive? And what are the rates of the False Positives & False Negatives which bedevil every testing regime? Every False Negative means an infected person is left to walk the streets.

    Realistically, with a virus which gives most infected people no or minimal symptoms and which has a long incubation period, containment is not possible. The virus will get through! Fortunately, it is “Not even the flu”. Instead of wasting resources trying to impose shut downs, it would be more productive to help the ‘At Risk’ population of the old & infirm to isolate themselves.

    But politicians and bureaucrats in the West can’t be rational about this. China over-reacted, so they feel they have to keep up with the Chinese. In the meantime, the probably more serious coming economic impacts from supply chain disruption are being ignored.

  2. There is usually a sustained bleating (in the Guardian, on the Beeb, and among the usual suspects) about how “poverty” is killing people in Britain.

    Why has that bleating been suspended? Surely the same people should be protesting at the very idea of shutting down the economy because that policy is bound to lead to more deaths. The irony is that, just for once, they would perhaps be right because a shutdown would cause many people to be genuinely poorer i.e. to have less money. And the disruption could impoverish people in the sense of making it difficult for them to get the food, and perhaps medicines, that they need.

    This contrasts with the Poverty Industry’s preferred definition of poverty which is, in fact, a deceit – it’s really a measure of inequality.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.