Pretty much every business group I’ve heard on the news are happy to open with restrictions.
until they open and costs are higher than income because people aren’t spending or allowed to spend, because of restrictions
Is that not what a business is? One that can make income higher than costs?
No business is, to my knowledge, going to be forced to reopen in Ireland (or Sweden)
1 Like
how could you do that when people aren’t allowed move?
the businesses will open up as movement does.
Temporary restrictions on movement and temporary closures on business make logical sense, in parallel.
Telling people to stay at home and businesses staying open is imbalanced.
It might not be nice or palatable, but it makes sound economic sense
But if there was no restriction on movement, as there isn’t in Sweden, the businesses can stay open?
The reality is that Ireland were forecast to have a Government current deficit of €21bn by the end of October whilst Sweden had around €20bn. Sweden has double the population and in real economy terms, we are spending a lot more than them. This is replicated across Europe, where our real deficit spending dwarfs others, and by hiding behind GDP figures and the ECB (combined with the confidence the financial markets have in the Irish Government) we are not seeing an interest increase. But there will still be a longer term structural deficit to deal with this, which will be more in Ireland than pretty much anywhere in Europe.
All countries have supports for businesses and all countries have put the burden on businesses. Ireland more than put the burden on small businesses here with the slowest reopening in Europe (along with dreadful communication on Covid regulations, which forced many businesses to do things themselves only to subsequently find they couldn’t reopen).
Ireland’s slowest reopening in Europe was for no reward vs other countries. Our case increase mirrored that of Europe until Mid October. If you want to argue about restrictions and timing, they could have been done then still with the same results.
The facts are that our strategy was supposed to be a slower reopening so we could assess the impacts of different sectors and get our tracing in order. Tracing failed and so has the modelling. Close contacts increased post the implementation of Level 5, which is staggering really given the cost of it.
NPHET are down to looking out the window onto Baggot Street and looking at a worry index. And just keep locking down, that’s it.
7 Likes
theoretically - if people were still moving it would make economical sense.
We’ve had this argument before about restrictions vs advice re travel and the impact on the airlines
Maybe it was @Tim_Riggins and Tim deemed the advice was sufficient to stop people travelling. The same argument exists here. The advice will stop people spending or moving (some) not all
Yes. But it’s advice in Sweden. It’s mandated here. Sweden has left it up to its population to do the right thing (or not) and is not faring any worse for it.
1 Like
they are fairing worse than here anyway - epidemically speaking, they have roughly double the population and have had roughly treble the cases and treble the deaths we’ve had
Granted. And what about all the countries with hard lockdowns who are faring worse than Sweden?
they tried everything not to go back into second lockdowns and couldn’t avoid it, in most cases.
whatever their unique situations are in dealing with the pandemic have led them to where they are.
would those places be better or worse off without the second strict lockdown, in cases and deaths?
Look - I can see the appeal of being asked to do something versus being told to do something.
When I was younger - without responsibilities etc, asking me to adhere to the current restrictions would have been akin to asking me bollix
Now I’m older, with responsibilities, I’d adhere to the ask.
Would I prefer to be asked than told, 100%
All told I think they would. I think the measures are disproportionate
Sweden have an older population than Ireland. The % of people over 65 is 20% versus 13% in Ireland, that translates to roughly 2M people over 65 versus 650k in Ireland. Roughly 3 times, imagine that.
I think what we are seeing as the pandemic unfolds is an equalizing in the death rate, regardless of the differences in measures taken in individual countries. Deaths per million: Spain 942, Italy 861, UK 831, US 801, France 775, Sweden 654, Ireland 410. It’s probably mostly to do with population density, urban centers were hit hardest first and rural areas later.
You can see the same thing in the US, early on there was a huge difference between the densely populated NE and rural states, but that has evened out over time.
2 Likes
If they are equalizing are the high ones getting lower and the low ones getting higher?
The Swedish government can’t implement a full lockdown because it would be unconstitutional. They’ve shut down what they can and are encouraging people to comply where they can’t. They’re in lockdown as much as any other country.
A bit of both? Poland the obvious case where deaths have really ramped up, but even Germany which had a very low death rate early on is now seeing similar numbers to other western European countries, 416 deaths yesterday, 382 the day before.
Their deaths (Germany) are only catching up to April’s rate now
Belgium look to have been impacted similarly
Globally, your theory isn’t playing out either
Right, but the point is the second wave is hitting countries harder that had lower death rates back in April, on a relative basis. Germany is at a daily rate of 400 versus 300 in April, France, Italy and Spain at about 700 versus 1,200. The time of year is probably a factor as well, people are indoors more and more susceptible to serious illness as we head into winter.
Could not getting caught on the hop and implementing measures in time have anything to do with it, this time around
There is definitely merit in the fact certain countries avoided a big hit in deaths the first time. But if they were able to do it the first time what changed? Relaxation around restrictions?