Boris and the Tories - Discuss

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Gordaleman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:20 pm

evensteadiereddie wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:10 pm
Johnson can't go wrong as long as berks like Dom the Dwarf keep out of it.
If we reach the worst case scenario, it's hardly Johnson's fault. National tragedy, we're all in it together, blah, blah.

If matters improve more rapidly, it's a great victory for a heroic administration and the er, bulldog, never say die attitude of the British people.
It seems like Cummings was orchestrating strategy in Februaryand not giving a sh*t for the old. If the PM allowed that and only changed tack a few days ago, that's down to Boris and Boris alone, if that strategy now costs thousands of lives. As he said himself, "Yes, the buck stops with me."

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 6087
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 1851 times
Has Liked: 5258 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by evensteadiereddie » Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:25 pm

Indeed, you'd hope that a time like this, selfish political strategy would be at the back of the queue and the formerly much - derided experts noticed and listened to, which now seems to be the case, thank God.

Grumps
Posts: 2107
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Grumps » Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:04 pm

Zlatan wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:05 pm
I know you’re being facetious but you know I mean that the sentiment was accurate for them
Them?
I thought me and you were roughly on the same page throughout this, not too sure now.

BurnleyFC
Posts: 987
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 356 times
Has Liked: 292 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by BurnleyFC » Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:11 pm

The only saving grace is that Steptoe and his mob aren’t in charge during this pandemic.

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 611 times
Has Liked: 227 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Billy Balfour » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:07 pm

Dominic Cummings isn't much of a fan of the elderly. He probably doesn't have a mum/dad or indeed any grandparents etc, though this does seem unlikely, unless he's the product of something spewed out of a sewer during a full moon.
This user liked this post: Zlatan

Gordaleman
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 3:04 pm
Been Liked: 209 times
Has Liked: 223 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Gordaleman » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:10 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:07 pm
Dominic Cummings isn't much of a fan of the elderly. He probably doesn't have a mum/dad or indeed any grandparents etc, though this does seem unlikely, unless he's the product of something spewed out of a sewer during a full moon.
Maybe he's a supporter of our friends down the road? You know, the No Dads?
Last edited by Gordaleman on Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: Billy Balfour

kentonclaret
Posts: 2674
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 467 times
Has Liked: 70 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by kentonclaret » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:10 pm

"Keep Calm and Carry On" used to be an attitude applied to the British people but the daily ransacking of supermarket shelves seems to have laid that one to rest.

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 611 times
Has Liked: 227 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Billy Balfour » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:14 pm

kentonclaret wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:10 pm
"Keep Calm and Carry On" used to be an attitude applied to the British people but the daily ransacking of supermarket shelves seems to have laid that one to rest.
Keep Calm and Carry On is a myth. They had to introduce rationing in 1940 because the shops were empty within an hour of opening.

Caballo
Posts: 774
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:31 am
Been Liked: 283 times
Has Liked: 248 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Caballo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:27 pm

BurnleyFC wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:11 pm
The only saving grace is that Steptoe and his mob aren’t in charge during this pandemic.
I suspect we'd be in a very similar position to where we are now, the advice being received would be coming from the same sources, there's only so many outcomes you can arrive at.

kentonclaret
Posts: 2674
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 467 times
Has Liked: 70 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by kentonclaret » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:33 pm

"They had to introduce rationing in 1940 because the shops were empty within an hour of opening"

There were no self service style stores or supermarkets in 1940 and the amount of stock being held by each shop would be extremely limited. Especially of fresh perishable items. Also the food supply chains were nowhere near as advanced as they are today. The first supermarket did not open in Britain until 1948 so the idea of customer's helping themselves was unheard of.

Comparisons to 1940 are somewhat unrealistic when it comes to food shopping today where home deliveries and families having fridges and freezers is just taken for granted. In 1940 families stored perishable items in a larder or pantry and hoped for the best.

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:48 pm

Wasnt that long ago, some of you remainers couldn't wait for pensioners to kick the bucket.
Now you are outraged at Cummings suggesting it might happen.
No wonder you cant be taken seriously

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:51 pm

BurnleyFC wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 1:11 pm
The only saving grace is that Steptoe and his mob aren’t in charge during this pandemic.
One thing for sure, the supermarkets wouldn't be running out of turnips if Corbyn was in charge

TVC15
Posts: 7319
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2905 times
Has Liked: 521 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by TVC15 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:12 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:48 pm
Wasnt that long ago, some of you remainers couldn't wait for pensioners to kick the bucket.
Now you are outraged at Cummings suggesting it might happen.
No wonder you cant be taken seriously
You post something like this and then say it’s no wonder others can’t be taken seriously ?
These 2 users liked this post: Gordaleman Greenmile

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:24 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:12 pm
You post something like this and then say it’s no wonder others can’t be taken seriously ?
Touched a nerve did it?

TVC15
Posts: 7319
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2905 times
Has Liked: 521 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by TVC15 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:42 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:24 pm
Touched a nerve did it?
Why would it ? I have never said that and know of anybody who has.
But feel free to carry on making sh-it up that people who voted remain wanted old people killed off early. That’s such a perfectly normal thing to post...and so tactful in this current climate.
This user liked this post: Gordaleman

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 5:59 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:42 pm
Why would it ? I have never said that and know of anybody who has.
But feel free to carry on making sh-it up that people who voted remain wanted old people killed off early. That’s such a perfectly normal thing to post...and so tactful in this current climate.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 41971.html

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:00 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:42 pm
Why would it ? I have never said that and know of anybody who has.
But feel free to carry on making sh-it up that people who voted remain wanted old people killed off early. That’s such a perfectly normal thing to post...and so tactful in this current climate.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-3-argum ... 59812.html

Right wing mouthpiece lib dem voice

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:03 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 3:42 pm
Why would it ? I have never said that and know of anybody who has.
But feel free to carry on making sh-it up that people who voted remain wanted old people killed off early. That’s such a perfectly normal thing to post...and so tactful in this current climate.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest ... s-19121705

Everyone's favourite remain voting, friend of saville, drug addict Terry Christian's views

Rileybobs
Posts: 7471
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3130 times
Has Liked: 722 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Rileybobs » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:04 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:03 pm
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest ... s-19121705

Everyone's favourite remain voting, friend of saville, drug addict Terry Christian's views
You have an enormous chip on your shoulder.

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:06 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:04 pm
You have an enormous chip on your shoulder.
Says you haha. You spend half your time on here taking offence at trivial things, and the other half of your time joking about people dieing
You are the boards biggest hypocrite

Rileybobs
Posts: 7471
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 3130 times
Has Liked: 722 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Rileybobs » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:08 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:06 pm
Says you haha. You spend half your time on here taking offence at trivial things, and the other half of your time joking about people dieing
You are the boards biggest hypocrite
Touched a nerve did it?

I'd love you to find an example of me taking offence at anything on this board or joking about anyone dying (note the speling), but I know that you won't be able to because you're making things up.

TVC15
Posts: 7319
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2905 times
Has Liked: 521 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by TVC15 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:10 pm

Yep those links really prove it - remainers want to kill of old people. I mean if someone as eminent as Sir Terry Christian posts something it must be true - he’s never said anything ridiculous.
QED.

Shall I post some right wing articles / extreme views about killing different races ? Or maybe that would be just as stupid as what you are saying.

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:19 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:10 pm
Yep those links really prove it - remainers want to kill of old people. I mean if someone as eminent as Sir Terry Christian posts something it must be true - he’s never said anything ridiculous.
QED.

Shall I post some right wing articles / extreme views about killing different races ? Or maybe that would be just as stupid as what you are saying.
You said you had never heard/read of anyone saying anything like that (and called me full of sh*t)
Just standing by my op and will await your apology or admittance of being wrong.
Wont hold my breath like

TVC15
Posts: 7319
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2905 times
Has Liked: 521 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by TVC15 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:23 pm

You said “some of you” remainers then said it had touched a nerve with me.
Has anybody on this board ever said that ? Who exactly were you referring to since you were posting on this board.

And why the f-uck would I apologise to an idiot who is posting sh-ite like this during a time like this ?
These 2 users liked this post: evensteadiereddie Claret-On-A-T-Rex

Damo
Posts: 3760
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1462 times
Has Liked: 2244 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Damo » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:34 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:23 pm
You said “some of you” remainers then said it had touched a nerve with me.
Has anybody on this board ever said that ? Who exactly were you referring to since you were posting on this board.

And why the f-uck would I apologise to an idiot who is posting sh-ite like this during a time like this ?
Plenty of examples on here too if you can be bothered to search.
CombatClaret wrote:
Thu Oct 24, 2019 11:55 pm
Is it not also morally wrong to ignore these newly enfranchised young citizens now eligible to vote but denied a say in a choice that will effect the rest of their lives in favour of people who no longer exist so therefor will not effect them in any way?

If anything that's an argument FOR a second referendum because democracy should come from the people, those new young remainers are part of said people. Callous as it sounds the dead, I'm afraid, are no longer part of the democratic process.
Not wishing to call people out but we have been over it several times

I dont want an apology from you by the way. You have always been one of the boards more emotional posters and I dont think you are capable of good faith

thatdberight
Posts: 3779
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:49 am
Been Liked: 924 times
Has Liked: 716 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by thatdberight » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:40 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:26 am
Do we know he actually said that? Could it be poor reporting?
It's not even quoted as Cummings' words. It's quoted as an unnamed someone's summation of their impression of Cummings' view.

TVC15
Posts: 7319
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 2905 times
Has Liked: 521 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by TVC15 » Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:49 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:34 pm
Plenty of examples on here too if you can be bothered to search.

Not wishing to call people out but we have been over it several times

I dont want an apology from you by the way. You have always been one of the boards more emotional posters and I dont think you are capable of good faith
That quote does not back up what you said at all - he’s talking about people who have already died since the original referendum.
But rather than come up with meaningless personal digs why don’t you actually try and find a post which said what you said - ie that people on this board said they wanted old people killed off early.....(and you are asking me for an apology after writing something like that !!)

And what exactly would you understand about good faith given what you are posting ?
This user liked this post: Claret-On-A-T-Rex

CombatClaret
Posts: 3275
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1458 times
Has Liked: 693 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by CombatClaret » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:12 pm

Damo wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 6:34 pm
Plenty of examples on here too if you can be bothered to search.

Not wishing to call people out but we have been over it several times

I dont want an apology from you by the way. You have always been one of the boards more emotional posters and I dont think you are capable of good faith
Please point out where I wish to kill off old people?
That the dead are no longer part of the democratic process is a statement I stand by.
This user liked this post: Claret-On-A-T-Rex

NewClaret
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 135 times
Has Liked: 88 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by NewClaret » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:23 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 2:07 pm
Dominic Cummings isn't much of a fan of the elderly. He probably doesn't have a mum/dad or indeed any grandparents etc, though this does seem unlikely, unless he's the product of something spewed out of a sewer during a full moon.
Disgraceful comment.

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 6087
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 1851 times
Has Liked: 5258 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by evensteadiereddie » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:23 pm

:lol:

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 611 times
Has Liked: 227 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Billy Balfour » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:30 pm

NewClaret wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:23 pm
Disgraceful comment.
Not half as disgraceful as what's been reported in today's newspapers about Cummings' lack of regard for our elderly citizens, but still, don't let that bother, eh...
This user liked this post: Zlatan

Grumps
Posts: 2107
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 420 times
Has Liked: 181 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Grumps » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:32 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:30 pm
Not half as disgraceful as what's been reported in today's newspapers about Cummings' lack of regard for our elderly citizens, but still, don't let that bother, eh...
It's not certain he actually made those comments, but still, don't let that bother, eh...

Billy Balfour
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 611 times
Has Liked: 227 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Billy Balfour » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:35 pm

Grumps wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:32 pm
It's not certain he actually made those comments, but still, don't let that bother, eh...
Well let's see if he sues the Sunday Times. What's the betting?

NewClaret
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 135 times
Has Liked: 88 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by NewClaret » Sun Mar 22, 2020 7:39 pm

Not going to get drawn in to it, other than to say there is no evidence whatsoever to support those articles.

Plenty of people around trying to politicise, scaremonger and profit from this crisis (inc Daily Mail). Utterly abhorrent in my opinion.

Paul Waine
Posts: 6056
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 1393 times
Has Liked: 1697 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Paul Waine » Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:13 pm

Are We Destroying Society In Order to Save It?

A blog by Prof Craig Pirrong: https://streetwiseprofessor.com/2020/03/

In 1968, journalist Peter Arnett claimed that a U.S. major had told him that a particular village in Vietnam, Ben Tre, had to be extirpated: “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it” (from the Vietcong), sayeth the major (according to Arnett). This has entered American discourse as “we had to destroy the village to save it.”

That phrase came to mind when contemplating the havoc wreaked by the CCP Virus. Europe is shutting down, country by country. Parts of the US have shut down. Others are on the verge of shutting down. The economic carnage is immense. Governments talk of spending trillions of dollars in various forms of relief: the loss of output/income will probably be measured in trillions.

Contra Hayek, it is the curious task of an economist to ask whether it’s worth it. That is, economics is predicated on the concept of scarcity, which in turn implies that every choice involves a trade-off. You want more of a good–or in the present instance, less of a bad–you have to give up something.
What price are you willing to pay? How much is saving 1000 lives worth? 10,000?

Orders of magnitude. Let’s say that shutting down the US economy through radical social distancing, quarantines, etc., saves 1000 lives, and costs $1 trillion. That works out to $1 billion per life. Moreover, the lives saved are most likely aged, infirm, sick individuals with short life expectancies and poor life quality.

Is that a price you are willing to pay? There is no right answer: the answer is subjective. Your answer may differ from mine. But when making decisions, it is a question we have to answer.

Increase the death toll by 10, and you are still at $100 million/life. This is far beyond any value of life estimate used in other regulatory and policy decisions.

If the cost of an economic shutdown is $1 trillion, you would have to save on the order of 100,000 lives to approximate the value of a statistical life (around $10 million) the US government uses for other policy making purposes.

I know that most people recoil at such calculations. The idea of valuing lives in dollars violates most people’s moral intuitions.

So let’s focus on lives. A major recession–or depression, which is not inconceivable–costs lives. Suicide rates go up. Substance abuse goes up, which costs lives in the near term (overdoses, fatal vehicle accidents) and the long term (substance abuse shortens lives). Stress-related fatalities (heart attack, stroke) go up. Murder rates go up. Consumption of health care declines, leading to premature deaths.

And then we can start talking about quality of life.

Pretty soon it adds up. We are not just evaluating the trade-off of lives for money. We are evaluating the trade-off of lives for lives.
That is, always remember Bastiat: think of the unseen. There is an unseen public health cost associated with major economic dislocation. That unseen cost has to be weighed against the cost that is right in front of our faces at present, i.e., the death toll from CPCV-19/20.

It is of course difficult to estimate, or even approximate, the various costs. Our radical ignorance about the virus makes it difficult to assess what the death toll would be under various policies. Similarly, we are operating in completely unexplored territory in trying to estimate the economic cost, let alone the health cost, of more or less draconian restrictions on our lives and movement.

But we have to at least confront the trade-off. Acknowledge it. Grapple with it. My strong sense is that the monomaniacal focus on controlling spread of the virus, the costs be damned, is operating according to the logic of destroying society in order to save it. That logic was absurd in 1968. It is absurd in 2020.

The comments accompanying this blog are also worth a read, if you find this interesting.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 6263
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 2417 times
Has Liked: 456 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by Devils_Advocate » Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:44 pm

Something that jumps out of me as missing from this viewpoint is the trade off between value of life and law and order. The more you devalue life then the less civilised a society is likely to be.

Investing in protecting life that is fragile and economically not worth saving has a far greater value in maintaining the social contract that keeps us all in the main obedient and subservient to those who govern and rule over us
This user liked this post: AndrewJB

AndrewJB
Posts: 3197
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1042 times
Has Liked: 646 times

Re: Boris and the Tories - Discuss

Post by AndrewJB » Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:09 pm

Paul Waine wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:13 pm
Are We Destroying Society In Order to Save It?

A blog by Prof Craig Pirrong: https://streetwiseprofessor.com/2020/03/

In 1968, journalist Peter Arnett claimed that a U.S. major had told him that a particular village in Vietnam, Ben Tre, had to be extirpated: “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it” (from the Vietcong), sayeth the major (according to Arnett). This has entered American discourse as “we had to destroy the village to save it.”

That phrase came to mind when contemplating the havoc wreaked by the CCP Virus. Europe is shutting down, country by country. Parts of the US have shut down. Others are on the verge of shutting down. The economic carnage is immense. Governments talk of spending trillions of dollars in various forms of relief: the loss of output/income will probably be measured in trillions.

Contra Hayek, it is the curious task of an economist to ask whether it’s worth it. That is, economics is predicated on the concept of scarcity, which in turn implies that every choice involves a trade-off. You want more of a good–or in the present instance, less of a bad–you have to give up something.
What price are you willing to pay? How much is saving 1000 lives worth? 10,000?

Orders of magnitude. Let’s say that shutting down the US economy through radical social distancing, quarantines, etc., saves 1000 lives, and costs $1 trillion. That works out to $1 billion per life. Moreover, the lives saved are most likely aged, infirm, sick individuals with short life expectancies and poor life quality.

Is that a price you are willing to pay? There is no right answer: the answer is subjective. Your answer may differ from mine. But when making decisions, it is a question we have to answer.

Increase the death toll by 10, and you are still at $100 million/life. This is far beyond any value of life estimate used in other regulatory and policy decisions.

If the cost of an economic shutdown is $1 trillion, you would have to save on the order of 100,000 lives to approximate the value of a statistical life (around $10 million) the US government uses for other policy making purposes.

I know that most people recoil at such calculations. The idea of valuing lives in dollars violates most people’s moral intuitions.

So let’s focus on lives. A major recession–or depression, which is not inconceivable–costs lives. Suicide rates go up. Substance abuse goes up, which costs lives in the near term (overdoses, fatal vehicle accidents) and the long term (substance abuse shortens lives). Stress-related fatalities (heart attack, stroke) go up. Murder rates go up. Consumption of health care declines, leading to premature deaths.

And then we can start talking about quality of life.

Pretty soon it adds up. We are not just evaluating the trade-off of lives for money. We are evaluating the trade-off of lives for lives.
That is, always remember Bastiat: think of the unseen. There is an unseen public health cost associated with major economic dislocation. That unseen cost has to be weighed against the cost that is right in front of our faces at present, i.e., the death toll from CPCV-19/20.

It is of course difficult to estimate, or even approximate, the various costs. Our radical ignorance about the virus makes it difficult to assess what the death toll would be under various policies. Similarly, we are operating in completely unexplored territory in trying to estimate the economic cost, let alone the health cost, of more or less draconian restrictions on our lives and movement.

But we have to at least confront the trade-off. Acknowledge it. Grapple with it. My strong sense is that the monomaniacal focus on controlling spread of the virus, the costs be damned, is operating according to the logic of destroying society in order to save it. That logic was absurd in 1968. It is absurd in 2020.

The comments accompanying this blog are also worth a read, if you find this interesting.
The figures seem to be very different to the U.K.’S figures in which nearly six hundred thousand die from inaction, and that number is halved by taking some measures. The US population is over five times that of the U.K. so we could be looking at well over a million people “saved”.

The reason for the article though, in my opinion, is because what is happening now is breaking with economic orthodoxy with the state taking control of the economy. The writer is afraid that if it works, people might suggest we do it again but in more limited ways - say to end homelessness, or to make low income jobs pay, or to reduce inequality. Already I’ve seen people on social media say that if so much money can be produced to deal with this crisis, why can’t they fund childcare, university, healthcare and other important things better during normal times? At least they wouldn’t have to find as much now. Indeed why did we have austerity at all? They are fair questions.

Post Reply