Coronavirus: social, economic and other changes as a result of the pandemic

[Dave2002]

No, that was "Reader, I married him". Mine was a mutatis mutandis response, since clearly I didn't marry Mr Rochester, so I couldn't say "Reader, I married him". As Dave2002 was (I thought lightheartedly) implying ignorance of the ending of Pride and Prejudice, I was merely lightheartedly recasting the sentence to settle his doubts, since Elizabeth Bennett does marry Mr Darcy.

:irony3:

Indeed. Further “investigation’ suggests that “Reader, I married him” has greater significance than we would think of nowadays.

Me ... joking. .... never!

[Petrushka]

Pride and Prejudice was my set text for 'O' Level back in 1970 and I really didn't like it at all. Then I decided to read it for pleasure 40 years later and found myself delighted by Jane Austen's gentle humour and astonishing insight into the way men think and act.

Lockdown project to read it again.

[french frank]

Jane Austen's gentle humour and astonishing insight into the way men think and act.

Yes, it's surely her world view, amused and amusing, that is the delight (if that's the kind of thing that delights you). That celebrated opening line of P&P encapsulates her humour - how she conveys her own amusement in the social attitudes of her time. I do confess to getting her heroines mixed up, though. I think I wrote a note of them somewhere to remind me.

[Leinster Lass]

I rarely if ever read books written in the 19th century or earlier. My favourite women writers include Susan Hill, Penelope Lively, Rose Tremain, Anne Tyler and Carol Shields, whose characters live lives to which I can relate. They also write nice short sentences most of the time! I find Kate Atkinson a bit more challenging, but have enjoyed quite a few of her books.

[Serial_Apologist]

Pride and Prejudice was my set text for 'O' Level back in 1970 and I really didn't like it at all. Then I decided to read it for pleasure 40 years later and found myself delighted by Jane Austen's gentle humour and astonishing insight into the way men think and act.

Lockdown project to read it again.

As a teenager Austen held no interest for me whatsoever: why should I be interested in a spoilt bunch of Regency upper class types? - sort of thing. Later her novels became a fascination from the pov of class and the attitudes and expectations it promulgates, and it remains so. How men think and act has changed since, if not all men; but even in my lifetime I detect huge changes in male attitudes in general towards women, and even towards LGBTs.

[french frank]

Later her novels became a fascination from the pov of class and the attitudes and expectations it promulgates

People have been talking about Michael Palin "constantly sending up the whole idea of Empire and British superiority" (rather than being part of it himself). The image he projects of himself is the send-up. So when Austen writes: "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife" - two things: 1) she knows from observation that in her social circles mothers with unmarried daughters will set out to cultivate a single man with wealth 2) she sees all the manœuvrings as highly amusing, displayed in her description of the situation.

Relevance to the thread, I suppose: things to read in lock-down. I have a complete set of "Jane" but am not in the mood for that at the moment.

[Anastasius]

....I detect huge changes in male attitudes in general towards women, and even towards LGBTs.

Which has to be a good thing. Pity that so many 'religions' are still stuck in their attitudes.

[Anastasius]

People have been talking about Michael Palin "constantly sending up the whole idea of Empire and British superiority" (rather than being part of it himself). The image he projects of himself is the send-up. So when Austen writes: "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife" - two things: 1) she knows from observation that in her social circles mothers with unmarried daughters will set out to cultivate a single man with wealth 2) she sees all the manœuvrings as highly amusing, displayed in her description of the situation.

Relevance to the thread, I suppose: things to read in lock-down. I have a complete set of "Jane" but am not in the mood for that at the moment.

It is interesting seeing other people's perspectives of lockdown. TBH for the two of us up here, it's very much 'business as usual'. We rarely go out, have no immediate family etc etc. That doesn't mean that I am insensitive to how it affects others.

[french frank]

There's an interview with Chris Whitty in the new BMJ, viewable here. Starts on p 222.

He's asked about 'herd immunity' ("My view is that it’s wrong scientifically, practically, and probably ethically. It’s really a pretty minority view, but it’s been seen as a much wider view. ")

Another question is about the 'tension' between health and the economy, the questioner saying that recent data show that countries which have done worst in terms of deaths (e.g. the UK) also do worst economically.

BMJ This suggests that it’s a false dichotomy to talk about health versus wealth and that we have to control the virus to restore our economy. Is that how you see things?

CW That is absolutely how I see things.

[teamsaint]

There's an interview with Chris Whitty in the new BMJ, viewable here. Starts on p 222.

He's asked about 'herd immunity' ("My view is that it’s wrong scientifically, practically, and probably ethically. It’s really a pretty minority view, but it’s been seen as a much wider view. ")

Another question is about the 'tension' between health and the economy, the questioner saying that recent data show that countries which have done worst in terms of deaths (e.g. the UK) also do worst economically.

BMJ This suggests that it’s a false dichotomy to talk about health versus wealth and that we have to control the virus to restore our economy. Is that how you see things?

CW That is absolutely how I see things.

Whitty and Vallance's credibility is thoroughly compromised now in many people's eyes.

It is their job advise on the immediate crisis in the best way they see fit, but they presented their case in a way both to government and at the press conference that was clearly misleading.
The current lockdown is actually a bit of a shambles, with lots of retail outlets open and many playing fast and loose with the rules.

IMO, and with reference to all the data that I can see, they should have extended and reinforced the tier system where necessary , which clearly was having a significant effect, and kept high streets open, and possibly kept hospitality settings open under very tight restrictions. That would have created a balance between the economy and virus control, given that the virus , is going to be with us for some time.

[french frank]

Whitty and Vallance's credibility is thoroughly compromised now in many people's eyes.

When people express their opinions and recommendations, one asks oneself Cui bono? Not many people come out of this well - anywhere (there are exceptions). On public health, I'd favour the views of people qualified to offer an opinion over people who aren't. Once people start to think their own views are as good as anyone else's we're on the road to B*****.

[teamsaint]

When people express their opinions and recommendations, one asks oneself Cui bono? Not many people come out of this well - anywhere (there are exceptions). On public health, I'd favour the views of people qualified to offer an opinion over people who aren't. Once people start to think their own views are as good as anyone else's we're on the road to B*****.

The data they presented was demonstrably badly flawed. There are plenty of well qualified people in the public health field who are against this lockdown, so this is not just about random people’s opinions. The WHO is against lockdowns except as a last resort .

[Cockney Sparrow]

When people express their opinions and recommendations, one asks oneself Cui bono? Not many people come out of this well - anywhere (there are exceptions). On public health, I'd favour the views of people qualified to offer an opinion over people who aren't. Once people start to think their own views are as good as anyone else's we're on the road to B*****.

What to do? Honesty in correcting a graph/data is strong meat to those who think their commercial interests are to open up and sell** and even more so to conspiracy theorists (I imagine the likes of Piers Corbyn and Icke are in overdrive). But the alternative is to suppress revision and cover up, Soviet style. Whoever has responsibility for these things - our government in this context has an unveniable task. As has been said - after revision the numbers of bed shortfall and excess deaths is still unacceptable.

(** The commercial sector think that by opening up the way will be clear to commercial normality. They forget the disclocation from rampant illness, mortality and disability and the reluctance of large sections of the population to turn up, buy, drink, eat and take the enhanced risk of infection.)

[Dave2002]

The recent job losses in Sainsbury's are interesting. As one might - hopefully - expect, the store did manage to distribute and sell more food, and apparently took on or redeployed staff to do so. However, the enterprise as a whole seems to have had failings, resulting in the job losses, and closure of fresh meat and fish counters.

Does this mean that a significant part of the business was based on selling non-essential, or not so essential items? Are similar observations to be made about many other businesses, which seem clearly less essential ab initio?

[french frank]

The data they presented was demonstrably badly flawed. There are plenty of well qualified people in the public health field who are against this lockdown, so this is not just about random people’s opinions. The WHO is against lockdowns except as a last resort .

So to quote Alexander Pope:

"WHO shall decide when doctors disagree?" Or who?