Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post Reply
User avatar
Bat Macdui
Posts: 20266
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:19 am

Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Bat Macdui »

And there I was thinking, well, we won't need another massive political thread on constitutional shite for AGES now. :look:

For people who may, like me, be digesting the various implications of all this, do have at it.

Useful: Institute of government summary of what happens when the PM is incapacitated.

Also useful - Ian Dunt retweeted this guy, Ryan Avent, a while back and I've been following him. @RyanAvent He's a journalist for The Economist and has some good and straight forward stuff about the economics of what's going on. This is an interesting read.

This Guardian article is good on UK strategies for exiting lockdown/ exit strategies post-pandemic.

I realise this isn't what everyone needs right now, but it might help others who, like me, are looking at this politically and strategically because you know, it's what I am interested in and good at.
User avatar
Ruby
Posts: 37288
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:54 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Ruby »

I like to have this sort of analysis, so I thank you. :)) I'm going to have a read of it later
Mountain Goat
Posts: 27178
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: London

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Mountain Goat »

I am also excited by this post, thank you.
Protected by the ejaculation of serpents
User avatar
Montana
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:01 pm

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Montana »

Thanks, Bats. I am finding the existence of this thread strangely comforting. I hadn't quite realised how much I was missing links to Ian Dunt retweets and the like. :love2:
User avatar
Morganna
Posts: 17303
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:25 pm
Location: Avalon

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Morganna »

I am interested in this from a sociological point of view, but it’s only after things have happened that they can be measured or observed, so there is bound to be a high level of speculation.

I think that there is potential for a major shake-up of attitudes to one another, and potentially a re-drawing of hierarchies (whether of status or economics).

We are already hearing muttering about how ‘low-skilled’ people should be better rewarded, and a combination of less money and fewer opportunities to mix and be seen are meaning that people are looking to curtail spending on non-essential items. That is likely to mean that manufacturing and retail of things like clothes and make-up (off the top of my head - it will apply to lots of other things too) will sharply decline, as will marketing and advertising of fashion.

What that will mean long-term is impossible to say - probably there will be an exponential growth in the development, manufacturing, marketing and retail of other items such as communication technologies that allow more working from home, so maybe it more a case of shifting focus than a seismic shift in the economic underpinning of society. But maybe not.

The bail out of people and business in recent weeks must surely have an impact on attitudes to the unemployed. How can people continue to say that £90 a week or whatever is an acceptable amount to give one group of people whilst another is getting up to £2500 a month with (AFAIK) no means test or conditions? Something will have to be done to equalise that, or there will be riots. I have no idea what the end result will be, and it’s impossible to predict, as these changes are usually very gradual, but we are potentially looking at a massive change in social security and attitudes to work and reward.

We could go down a scary road of enforcement of the status quo, protecting differentials between groups of people etc, or we could explore the options. A more mixed economic system that allowed people to be paid to work simultaneously between sectors such as caring, production and supplying essentials could be great for mental health overall, and rebalance relationships between people. I don’t know.

That’s enough of me wittering for now though. As you can see, I have given this some thought. :blah:
User avatar
Smunder Woman
Consciously Unbellended
Posts: 20498
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Glasgow

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Smunder Woman »

Thanks Bats :))
User avatar
Heebie Jeebie
Posts: 15934
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Heebie Jeebie »

Ruby wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 10:42 am I like to have this sort of analysis, so I thank you. :)) I'm going to have a read of it later
Me too!
User avatar
Bat Macdui
Posts: 20266
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:19 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Bat Macdui »

The Guardian Live Feed has confirmation of what happens if Raab becomes unwell. It is not enormously reassuring.

Rishi Sunak, the chancellor, would take over if Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary who is deputising for the PM, got ill, the spokesman said. The spokesman said there was an established order of precedence in the government. After Raab, Sunak, is the next most senior person in the government, the spokesman said. (The spokesman sidestepped a question about who was next in seniority, and “how long it would take before Thérèse Coffey took charge”, but the order of precedence is normally the order in which ministers are listed on the official No 10 website. In theory, after Sunak, Priti Patel, the home secretary, and Michael Gove, the Cabinet Office minister, are next in seniority - in that order. Coffey is 11th on the list.)
User avatar
sally maclennane
Posts: 48957
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:01 pm

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by sally maclennane »

Youd be better with Dilyn the Dog and Larry the Cat than some of those eejits.
Christ on a bendy bus son, don't be such a fucking faff arse
User avatar
Montana
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:01 pm

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Montana »

Pritti Patel has not been seen (and barely heard from) once during this entire crisis. She is clearly seen as a complete liability. I can't believe that if it came to it she would be allowed to take charge!
Mountain Goat
Posts: 27178
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: London

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Mountain Goat »

What are the chances of this being unsustainable due to being led by unelected and progressively more incapable people and we have to go to a national unity govt or something else? Is there a flow chart which ends in Keir taking charge? I KNOW I AM DREAMING.
Protected by the ejaculation of serpents
User avatar
Montana
Posts: 2910
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:01 pm

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Montana »

Every great achievement must start with a dream followed by a flowchart :fish:
User avatar
emma_p
Posts: 39028
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:50 pm
Location: stateside

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by emma_p »

S thinks there is a chance of a government of national unity.
Mountain Goat
Posts: 27178
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: London

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Mountain Goat »

Montana wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 2:51 pm Every great achievement must start with a dream followed by a flowchart :fish:
:mog: It's true!

Oh does he?! This gives me hope. This isn't part of his fever? :))
Protected by the ejaculation of serpents
User avatar
sally maclennane
Posts: 48957
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 7:01 pm

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by sally maclennane »

I dont know if this should be on here or the more general CV thread but I love this guy for his knowledge but also his name :))

https://www.economist.com/open-future/2 ... openfuture
Christ on a bendy bus son, don't be such a fucking faff arse
User avatar
Bat Macdui
Posts: 20266
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:19 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Bat Macdui »

I can't get down to what I think about a government of national unity. On the one hand, probably a good idea to mitigate the current shitshow. But also, Labour have been out of power for years now, so might not be that much better at what's needed now; clear instructions, logistics, organising the civil service, bringing whole different organisations and departments together.

And if I'm thinking from a long term next election point of view, it could bugger up Labour by making them part culpable. Obvs, then, you're weighing potential for improvements in governing now, which could save lives, versus long term electability. Which then seem mercenary. But also, long term negative impact on the electability of Labour means the needy get more stuffed in the aftermath.
Mountain Goat
Posts: 27178
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 12:14 pm
Location: London

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Mountain Goat »

It's when it gets complicated that I realise I'm not as much better as I thought I was. :lg: :))
Protected by the ejaculation of serpents
User avatar
Bat Macdui
Posts: 20266
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:19 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Bat Macdui »

There's so many variables on it as well. Who is in charge of either party when we get to another election, for example. Traditionally, across borders and nations, electorates do not re-elect politicians who have been incapacitated whilst in power.

Goat, just try and mentally systemise everything for a minimum of five years in advance. Permanently. :))
User avatar
Bat Macdui
Posts: 20266
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:19 am

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Bat Macdui »

Also: this is quite, quite beautiful. :love2: The first time I had proper therapy the therapist asked me what I thought might make me happy and I drew her a flow chart. :))
Montana wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 2:51 pm Every great achievement must start with a dream followed by a flowchart :fish:
Red
Posts: 4606
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:45 pm
Location: People's Republic of Mancunia

Re: Pandemic Politics and Economics

Post by Red »

Bat Macdui wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 3:12 pm And if I'm thinking from a long term next election point of view, it could bugger up Labour by making them part culpable. Obvs, then, you're weighing potential for improvements in governing now, which could save lives, versus long term electability. Which then seem mercenary. But also, long term negative impact on the electability of Labour means the needy get more stuffed in the aftermath.
I read an article somewhere over the weekend (might have been Dunt? If so, more a series of tweets) after Starmer was made Labour leader which explored some of the possibilities. Approval for Johnson is high but there will be some inevitable, very public failings in the management of this which could turn public opinion very quickly. Starmer is a detail man and after the dust has settled somewhat, the obvious underfunding of the NHS, failure to take Covid seriously, the prospect of herd immunity as a solution plus the economic hell that will follow could un-do a blustering, clownish PM.

And as Morgs said, there will be some social change on the back of this. How the hell do the Tories go back to underfunding the NHS, calling immigrants low skilled and paying the unemployed £90 quid a week or whatever?

Finally, Starmer, do we think fit or what? I think quite fit but with possible coffee breath.
Jesus loves you. Everyone else thinks you're an asshole.
Post Reply