The best way to look at this is this: the trade-off is not between the economy and the spread of the virus. It is between the price, capability and ultimately bravery of good governance and economic recovery.
There is a need to be bold, and there is an urgency for leadership to get new ideas approved. There is a need for the spending of an enormous amount of government cash. There is a need for planning, and good management of new schemes which are developed to meet our society's objectives: to reduce inequality, to increase skills and wages, to build what needs to be built to expand the productive capacity of the economy, to reduce our carbon emissions, to clean our air and our waste. Does the government have what it takes to start a new economy? To build from crisis something markedly better than what was before? Or are they obsessed with Brexit and their trade talks failing, the Prime Minister's cult of personality and his partner and new child, and with Michael Gove's ego, and with their own investments losing value, with refusing to acknowledge reality and apologise for what they have got wrong?
To put this another way: if the virus continues to kill people in the way it's doing today, there will be no recovery, lockdown or no lockdown, going to work and school or not. Combating the virus isn't a trade-off with future growth. It's a precondition.
The Americans and Chinese have made up their minds to go right back into the old way in a desperate, headlong rush to bounce back on GDP and jobs, and the effect on society and the environment be damned. The UK has the perfect opportunity to show how we will lead here. But will a man like Johnson take it, or copy the others?
This is supported by all of the historical evidence from the last Pandemic a little over a century ago. The cities who lifted the restrictions too soon suffered more economically than the ones who waited for the right time. The 'right time' is absolutely 100% not going to be determined by Lord Lamont, some random businessman from York, writers in the Telegraph, or commentators on the forum.
I have attempted on a couple of occasions to convince @yorkie and others of this before, although it would seem I wasn't especially successful. Fair enough.
There is a need to be bold, and there is an urgency for leadership to get new ideas approved. There is a need for the spending of an enormous amount of government cash. There is a need for planning, and good management of new schemes which are developed to meet our society's objectives: to reduce inequality, to increase skills and wages, to build what needs to be built to expand the productive capacity of the economy, to reduce our carbon emissions, to clean our air and our waste. Does the government have what it takes to start a new economy? To build from crisis something markedly better than what was before? Or are they obsessed with Brexit and their trade talks failing, the Prime Minister's cult of personality and his partner and new child, and with Michael Gove's ego, and with their own investments losing value, with refusing to acknowledge reality and apologise for what they have got wrong?
To put this another way: if the virus continues to kill people in the way it's doing today, there will be no recovery, lockdown or no lockdown, going to work and school or not. Combating the virus isn't a trade-off with future growth. It's a precondition.
The Americans and Chinese have made up their minds to go right back into the old way in a desperate, headlong rush to bounce back on GDP and jobs, and the effect on society and the environment be damned. The UK has the perfect opportunity to show how we will lead here. But will a man like Johnson take it, or copy the others?
This is supported by all of the historical evidence from the last Pandemic a little over a century ago. The cities who lifted the restrictions too soon suffered more economically than the ones who waited for the right time. The 'right time' is absolutely 100% not going to be determined by Lord Lamont, some random businessman from York, writers in the Telegraph, or commentators on the forum.
I have attempted on a couple of occasions to convince @yorkie and others of this before, although it would seem I wasn't especially successful. Fair enough.
Personally I've given a little bit of money that I'd have spent on holidays, travel, events, eating out etc etc to NHS Charities Together on a monthly basis, opened a new savings account at a well rated ethical bank, and bought a few little bits and bobs online, most of which were gifts, from firms I reckon aren't too bad. Examples including Brynmawr (flapjacks), Kombucha (tea drink), Graze (snacks) and a local woman making masks on Facebook. I also support some creative types whose work I value using Patreon. Obviously this doesn't totally cover it but there are ideas there.I spend a significant part of my income om leisure activity. Mainly attending sporting events and concerts, eating out and travel from and to these events. I am lucky that I am working so my income is the same but my spending has reduced. I am more than willing to spend money and resume my lifestyle once lockdown is over but what am I supposed to spend my money on to keep the economy going in the meantime?