UK officially in recession for first time in 11 years(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
UK officially in recession for first time in 11 years
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53748278
106 comments
I recently saw a graph that shocked me. Basically the UKs per capita GDP has been constant since 2008 ! If you smooth out the ups and downs it’s just gone sideways.
The UK is a nation that is stagnating and this one two punch could be what pushes it into a decline.
Brexit has become something of a religious movement. Things will magically get better after brexit but first you need suffer for your past sins before you get to the promised land. It’s not at all clear how this will happen but the less possible it looks the stronger the faithful become.
People like me who try to dissuade people from Brexit try to paint a picture of doom and chaos. The UK will be “fine” but it will fall in the League of Nations to the influence of an Italy or a Spain and in the long term this can be hard to swallow for people used to the glories of empire.
This is also one of the most egregious cases of the older generation screwing over the futures of a younger generation by taking away huge opportunities from them. The enormity of this will take a decade to sink in. You’re going to see a lot of pissed off zoomers in 10 years who’ll work to reverse all of this anyway.
The UK is a nation that is stagnating and this one two punch could be what pushes it into a decline.
Brexit has become something of a religious movement. Things will magically get better after brexit but first you need suffer for your past sins before you get to the promised land. It’s not at all clear how this will happen but the less possible it looks the stronger the faithful become.
People like me who try to dissuade people from Brexit try to paint a picture of doom and chaos. The UK will be “fine” but it will fall in the League of Nations to the influence of an Italy or a Spain and in the long term this can be hard to swallow for people used to the glories of empire.
This is also one of the most egregious cases of the older generation screwing over the futures of a younger generation by taking away huge opportunities from them. The enormity of this will take a decade to sink in. You’re going to see a lot of pissed off zoomers in 10 years who’ll work to reverse all of this anyway.
See, this is what annoys people about the anti-Brexit brigade.
There are two very important facts you're not giving people here. Firstly, yes, the UK has had stagnant GDP per capita since 2008. So has Germany, so has France. So has Switzerland, since 2010. Clearly, this is not a UK specific issue.
The exceptions? America and ... Ireland. That's tech companies. They are big enough to move per capita GDP by themselves.
The second rather important fact is that the UK is still a part of the EU today for all intents and purposes. It still has to pay and is still a part of all the systems. What you're saying is that as part of the EU the UK, and additionally other major European economies, have seen 12 years of economic stagnation.
You know what one of the top arguments for Brexit was? The EU is a stagnant economy, structurally so, and it's getting worse. If we leave we can be more dynamic and fix that problem.
hard to swallow for people used to the glories of empire.
This is such a bizarre, insulting and ridiculous talking point. Remainers bring it up repeatedly but I've never encountered someone who supports Brexit who talks about the British Empire. It doesn't happen. It's a fantasy.
There are two very important facts you're not giving people here. Firstly, yes, the UK has had stagnant GDP per capita since 2008. So has Germany, so has France. So has Switzerland, since 2010. Clearly, this is not a UK specific issue.
The exceptions? America and ... Ireland. That's tech companies. They are big enough to move per capita GDP by themselves.
The second rather important fact is that the UK is still a part of the EU today for all intents and purposes. It still has to pay and is still a part of all the systems. What you're saying is that as part of the EU the UK, and additionally other major European economies, have seen 12 years of economic stagnation.
You know what one of the top arguments for Brexit was? The EU is a stagnant economy, structurally so, and it's getting worse. If we leave we can be more dynamic and fix that problem.
hard to swallow for people used to the glories of empire.
This is such a bizarre, insulting and ridiculous talking point. Remainers bring it up repeatedly but I've never encountered someone who supports Brexit who talks about the British Empire. It doesn't happen. It's a fantasy.
Okay let’s take this one by one :
Germany’s per capita GDP has also stagnated: Thats because you chose the date as 2010. I was comparing to the 2008 peak and in comparison UK has gone down but Germany is up. The UK does somewhat worse than the others.
Now on top of this stagnation Brexit will make it worse because you will lose the vast majority of your trading advantages. There’s no magical resurgence that’s going to happen.
As for empire nostalgia as someone who moved from a colony it’s actually quite evident in the politics here. That there is some magic sauce in this tiny island which will allow it to somehow return to glory all by itself.
A poll by YouGov showed that 27 % of Britons want Britain to still have an empire. Closely followed by Netherlands at 26 % and France at 17 %. So these people exist. They are not a fantasy and there’s polling data to show it.
My point wasn’t that they vote for brexit because of the empire. But it feeds into a sense of exceptionalism and megalomania that goes into decisions like Brexit which the vast majority of international observers of the situation agree is a very foolish decision.
It’s just like voting for Trump. Everyone outside the US could plainly see the idiocy and hordes of people would descend to defend it while every passing day exposes it for the foolishness it was. Same will be the case here.
Germany’s per capita GDP has also stagnated: Thats because you chose the date as 2010. I was comparing to the 2008 peak and in comparison UK has gone down but Germany is up. The UK does somewhat worse than the others.
Now on top of this stagnation Brexit will make it worse because you will lose the vast majority of your trading advantages. There’s no magical resurgence that’s going to happen.
As for empire nostalgia as someone who moved from a colony it’s actually quite evident in the politics here. That there is some magic sauce in this tiny island which will allow it to somehow return to glory all by itself.
A poll by YouGov showed that 27 % of Britons want Britain to still have an empire. Closely followed by Netherlands at 26 % and France at 17 %. So these people exist. They are not a fantasy and there’s polling data to show it.
My point wasn’t that they vote for brexit because of the empire. But it feeds into a sense of exceptionalism and megalomania that goes into decisions like Brexit which the vast majority of international observers of the situation agree is a very foolish decision.
It’s just like voting for Trump. Everyone outside the US could plainly see the idiocy and hordes of people would descend to defend it while every passing day exposes it for the foolishness it was. Same will be the case here.
The UK is a financial centre, obviously if you pick as your start date a financial bubble it will look different.
But 10 years have passed. You were misleading people when you tried to imply that Brexit had something to do with GDP per capita statistics. It clearly doesn't. And many argue it's the other way around: the EU is the cause of the stagnation.
As for empire nostalgia as someone who moved from a colony it’s actually quite evident in the politics here
Evident in the politics? If it's evident then evidence it. You're seeing what you want to see: I can't recall any politicians talking about Empire. It never comes up. It's not even taught in school. The "people used to the glories of the empire" as you put it are virtually all dead. Nobody cares.
As for polls, they routinely show all kinds of garbage when pollsters ask questions that don't matter. For example 4% Americans believe the Earth is run by a conspiracy of lizards, and 7% aren't sure:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and...
If some random person wasted my time by asking me if I'd like Britain to still have an empire, I'd probably say, sure why not? Empires have their benefits. Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer. That doesn't mean I'd think about it even one iota the rest of the time. Heck there was an HN thread just a few days ago about colonialism, that was the first time I'd seen it come up in years.
it feeds into a sense of exceptionalism and megalomania
The majority of the British voting population are not megalomaniacs. Listen to yourself. The very concept is absurd.
Anyway, if you're really convinced the UK is filled with delusional imperialist megalomaniacs, why not leave? You clearly have no respect for the country.
But 10 years have passed. You were misleading people when you tried to imply that Brexit had something to do with GDP per capita statistics. It clearly doesn't. And many argue it's the other way around: the EU is the cause of the stagnation.
As for empire nostalgia as someone who moved from a colony it’s actually quite evident in the politics here
Evident in the politics? If it's evident then evidence it. You're seeing what you want to see: I can't recall any politicians talking about Empire. It never comes up. It's not even taught in school. The "people used to the glories of the empire" as you put it are virtually all dead. Nobody cares.
As for polls, they routinely show all kinds of garbage when pollsters ask questions that don't matter. For example 4% Americans believe the Earth is run by a conspiracy of lizards, and 7% aren't sure:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and...
If some random person wasted my time by asking me if I'd like Britain to still have an empire, I'd probably say, sure why not? Empires have their benefits. Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer. That doesn't mean I'd think about it even one iota the rest of the time. Heck there was an HN thread just a few days ago about colonialism, that was the first time I'd seen it come up in years.
it feeds into a sense of exceptionalism and megalomania
The majority of the British voting population are not megalomaniacs. Listen to yourself. The very concept is absurd.
Anyway, if you're really convinced the UK is filled with delusional imperialist megalomaniacs, why not leave? You clearly have no respect for the country.
Italy or Spain is a best-case scenario. Looking at recent polls in Scotland - where support for the Union has collapsed among the under 50s - the UK will be lucky to still be a single country in 10 or 15 years' time.
Scottish exit is a very difficult idea to implement. Tories won’t allow another referendum at any cost. I feel for them and hope they can exit and rejoin EU.
Data shows that even British natives are leaving in higher numbers:
https://apnews.com/2be77e0ade49893bfefe508eb15c2d56
I suspect the government will use the pandemic as cover for all the failures of Brexit, and they will get away with it given the dire state of British traditional and social media. You're better off out of it.
https://apnews.com/2be77e0ade49893bfefe508eb15c2d56
I suspect the government will use the pandemic as cover for all the failures of Brexit, and they will get away with it given the dire state of British traditional and social media. You're better off out of it.
It's hard to say what will happen. It's not like the EU project is a stable, sure-win project. The EU could potentially collapse. Even if it doesn't a Euro devaluation against other currencies (not necessarily USD) may happen because the south needs to be bailed out. Add to that stagnant growth, rising populism, backlash against immigration etc etc.
After the UK voted for Brexit I became interested in what treaties and trade deals are and how they are made. It turns out to be much more complex than I had imagined. The amount of legal and diplomatic work that the UK is facing is unfathomable. I can't see any scenario where this is not going to be extremely expensive.
> those who were betting on Brexit were probably doing so thinking it might be a little bit tough
No. Nobody who voted for Brexit was thinking logically or clearly at all. Anybody can dismiss this as a political opinion, but not a single person who supported brexit did so for anything other than :
* Flag-waving nationalism. * Financial self-interest from a long-term reduction in EU standards. * Perceived (but incorrect) financial self-interest.
No. Nobody who voted for Brexit was thinking logically or clearly at all. Anybody can dismiss this as a political opinion, but not a single person who supported brexit did so for anything other than :
* Flag-waving nationalism. * Financial self-interest from a long-term reduction in EU standards. * Perceived (but incorrect) financial self-interest.
Nonsense. I think Brexit was a particularly stupid idea but I've spoken to a number of people who voted for Brexit and every one had a perfectly sound reason that I happen to disagree with or don't consider an important issue. Interestingly (to me), not one of them voted for financial reasons.
> a perfectly sound reason
Please, do elaborate.
Because I'm yet to hear a sensible reason for Brexit that doesn't end up with general pearl-clutching about soverignity or can stand up to any sort of logical argument.
Please, do elaborate.
Because I'm yet to hear a sensible reason for Brexit that doesn't end up with general pearl-clutching about soverignity or can stand up to any sort of logical argument.
> as coronavirus lockdown measures pushed the country officially into recession.
This is nothing to do with brexit.
This is nothing to do with brexit.
Yep, this is the first punch from the Corona and the second punch will be beginning of next year when they end up with no deal.
The sad thing is that everyone will say that Brexit went through great with no issues, it's the Coronavirus' fault that the economy is bad and is getting worse.
The sad thing is that everyone will say that Brexit went through great with no issues, it's the Coronavirus' fault that the economy is bad and is getting worse.
The fact that the economy shrank is due to covid response.
The fact that the economy shrank 22% over the last year rather than 12% in Germany or 10% in the US (a 10% growth difference is _enormous_!) is up to Brexit and government ministers selected not on the back of competence but by picking from the strongest Brexit advocates.
The fact that the economy shrank 22% over the last year rather than 12% in Germany or 10% in the US (a 10% growth difference is _enormous_!) is up to Brexit and government ministers selected not on the back of competence but by picking from the strongest Brexit advocates.
Things had already started looking very shaky even before Covid-19. City firms moving jobs abroad. Companies seeing orders drop off as EU buyers switched to sources that wouldn’t be affected if the UK left the transition period without a deal. Even with a deal, not being in the same customs union introduces issues that EU customers can avoid by switching suppliers.
Yes, but Brexit won't help the (now much more acutely needed) recovery.
> I have just left the UK, several Europeans I know, working in tech, are doing the same. Not data backed, just personal experience. Maybe this is going to be even tougher than expected. Hopefully not.
Out of interest, where did you end up?
Ireland looks tempting to me, given I currently work as a contractor (and the tax law isn't too hostile) and it's not _too_ far away.
Out of interest, where did you end up?
Ireland looks tempting to me, given I currently work as a contractor (and the tax law isn't too hostile) and it's not _too_ far away.
I dunno, the point of hard moves like Brexit is that it gets way worse before it gets better. But I'm sure it will be better.
Germany and the rest of EU are just oblivious for now.
Germany and the rest of EU are just oblivious for now.
What will get better? There are basically no economic benefits since the UK still has to follow EU regulations and pay tariffs on top of that, if it wants to export its products and services to EU countries.
The biggest change is that the UK can close its borders to citizens of EU countries.
The biggest change is that the UK can close its borders to citizens of EU countries.
Brexit at this point is a faith-based religion based on a mythical "British exceptionalism" that views any attempt at compromise as heresy. No serious expert in economics or international trade thinks it's a good idea.
Congrats on getting out!
[deleted]
[deleted]
BBC desperately trying to add some positivity to the headline. It's the worst recession on record, and yet they are clamouring onto this notion that it has been an achievement of success that it has been 11 years since the last recession.
BBC has been very pro-lockdown, pro-panic the whole time. Now they are seeing the results and trying to spin it positively, so less anger reflects back at them.
Excited for my second once in a lifetime economic correction!
I was born to a war, graduated to the 2008 recession, and now it's 2020. Still, excluding my parents generation, I consider myself very lucky.
Ah ha I have another event, I graduated in 2002 right into the dot-com bubble burst, with its mass unemployment in software development. That was a hard time as a grad, competing against massive amounts of experienced professionals with a massively reduced job market then with a follow up 2008 recession and now a 2020 recession.
Millennials keep getting fucked.
Millennials keep getting fucked.
Counterpoint I don't have a particular attachment to, but think about often: Millennials are a touchy feely hopes and dreams generation, and things were just as bad in different areas for boomers, but boomers were raised by people who had the attitude of "We're lucky to be alive!"
I think boomers had it easier economically. For example one person (usually the man) could support a whole family with one pay check back in the days (including owning a home, sending kids to college etc). That can very rarely be done nowadays.
Also unions are mostly a thing of the past - so you have a whole new class of people who have very precarious existence, going from one temp job to the next (I recommend watching Guy Standing's talk 'The Precariat'). Many of our parents worked for the same company from their 20s to retirement - how many of us will be able to do that? Hell - how many of us will even work in the same profession from 20s to retirement?
I think if you gave the generations born from 1914 through the late sixties / early seventies the choice between the existential threats they lived through in that period and the perceived economic hardship younger generations suffer today, they would pick economic hardship every single time.
Most western countries have also had a huge rise in living standards during the same time period meaning that the conception of 'economic hardship' is very different today to the post-war depression.
Most western countries have also had a huge rise in living standards during the same time period meaning that the conception of 'economic hardship' is very different today to the post-war depression.
Sorry I see my comment was misleading , I meant baby boomers (born after 45+). I think a lot of millennials feel like their parents are better off than they will be.
Gotcha! Thanks for the replies. A really interesting area and very hard to quantify overall either way. I find that usually when people frame it in the terms I did, most people (not you because you seem very considerate already!) think about the post-war pre-70s generations in more kindhearted terms.
Now all I said doesn't mean life was perfect back then, you had wars, racism, chauvinism etc etc. Being a woman is certainly better today than it was then. But if you judge purely by economics and life stability - they had it better.
> life stability
Anyone born 1914 through 1945 experienced either one or two wars plus the post-war depression.
Anyone born 1952 through to the early seventies lived under the cloud of imminent nuclear holocaust (read interviews with those who lived in those times -- especially those with first-hand knowledge of the Cuban missile crisis -- and you'll realise just how certain people felt that they were going to be annihilated).
I think the mid-seventies onwards are the earliest you can say that people have had a sense of existential stability.
Anyone born 1914 through 1945 experienced either one or two wars plus the post-war depression.
Anyone born 1952 through to the early seventies lived under the cloud of imminent nuclear holocaust (read interviews with those who lived in those times -- especially those with first-hand knowledge of the Cuban missile crisis -- and you'll realise just how certain people felt that they were going to be annihilated).
I think the mid-seventies onwards are the earliest you can say that people have had a sense of existential stability.
The seventies were pretty tumultuous in the UK - The Troubles, Winter of Discontent and then eventually the Falklands War in the early 80s
Absolutely agreed, but totally convinced that all of those pale by comparison of the existential threat which humanity as a whole experienced prior to that.
1) We also live under the cloud of nuclear holocaust, it's a bit less likely now but not 100% unlikely. We also have climate change and AI now which they didn't.
2) I was referring to baby boomers, so 1945 and after. Obviously people before that lived through unimaginable horrors as u said. And many of our parents were raised by traumatised parents, I'm not denying that.
Yeah I just hope and pray that this century doesn't turn out like the early-to-mid 20th century.
What a time to be alive!
Out of curiosity, why are you excited about this?
2009 happened.
The 2008 recession was considered a "once-in-a-lifetime" event. it's ironic that we're now experiencing a second.
I imagine op is referring to 08-09 which was touted as the biggest economic crash since The Depression.
Maybe they want to "buy the dip" and bet on a recovery. Or maybe they've been shorting UK Plc somehow :-)
Sorry, I was being facetious: my second once in a lifetime economic correction :)
Only second?
Comparing corona-quarantine times with normal times is silly.
But the recession has hit the UK harder than many other European countries. That strikes me as comparable and indicates that it has been more poorly handled by the UK than by other countries.
Do you have any more figures than what's in the article?
In the article it's got these figures:
> The economy is more than a fifth smaller than it was at the end of last year. This fall is not as bad as the 22.7% decline in Spain, but about twice the size of contractions in Germany and the US.
I think Germany's handling was exceptional anyway, and for the US it hasn't hit fully yet. I reckon there's a lot more to come in the UK, as well, when the government furlough scheme comes to an end. And not to forget to mention the country is still in the Brexit transition period, which runs out at the end of the year.
> The economy is more than a fifth smaller than it was at the end of last year. This fall is not as bad as the 22.7% decline in Spain, but about twice the size of contractions in Germany and the US.
I think Germany's handling was exceptional anyway, and for the US it hasn't hit fully yet. I reckon there's a lot more to come in the UK, as well, when the government furlough scheme comes to an end. And not to forget to mention the country is still in the Brexit transition period, which runs out at the end of the year.
Interestingly, the Q2 results for Spain are actually better than for the UK (-18.5% vs -20.4%). It's only the comparison to the end of 2019 numbers specifically where Spain comes out worse.
Debatable why, plausibly because the Spanish lockdown started earlier in Q1.
Since the entirety of the rest of the article is about today's Q2 results specifically though, a comparison of those would be more relevant. Smells like the BBC cherry picking to try and find anything where the UK isn't in last place.
Debatable why, plausibly because the Spanish lockdown started earlier in Q1.
Since the entirety of the rest of the article is about today's Q2 results specifically though, a comparison of those would be more relevant. Smells like the BBC cherry picking to try and find anything where the UK isn't in last place.
It's almost certainly because the Spanish lockdown started earlier in Q1 - if I remember rightly, other articles have mentioned that the UK saw less of an economic decline in Q1 than many other European countries precisely because of the timing of our lockdown. Comparing Q1 to Q2 results and comparing countries based on that would therefore be misleading, because it's not measuring actual economic differences but an artifact of how lockdown timing happened to align with our arbitrary measurement cut-offs.
(Also, speaking of misleading, it's interesting that all of a sudden the BBC can correctly compare US GDP figures with European ones now that it's the UK they're comparing with. Previous coverage quoted US quarterly figures that had been multiplied by four to annualize them next to non-annualized European ones, making it look like the US was doing worse economically than other European countries like Spain when it was doing better.)
(Also, speaking of misleading, it's interesting that all of a sudden the BBC can correctly compare US GDP figures with European ones now that it's the UK they're comparing with. Previous coverage quoted US quarterly figures that had been multiplied by four to annualize them next to non-annualized European ones, making it look like the US was doing worse economically than other European countries like Spain when it was doing better.)
I think any handling mainly has come down to luck and how people responded to the threat. The prevalence of the virus isn't evenly spread throughout different regions with mainly the same rules, with just some local adaptations. I think luck is at least as much important as policies, probably much more relevant though.
There is a well made map in this article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_recession
There is a well made map in this article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_recession
I don't believe it's very productive to say who handled it well and who didn't while we're still in the middle of it. Is a massive stimulus/public intervention the right call, or does it just delay the shrinking but adds plenty of public debt?
The same, I believe, goes for comparing infections & death rates. Calling a marathon by who's in the lead at the 10km mark can turn out correct, but it doesn't have to.
The same, I believe, goes for comparing infections & death rates. Calling a marathon by who's in the lead at the 10km mark can turn out correct, but it doesn't have to.
No, the primary reason is that the UK is a heavily service-based economy. Quarantine impacts the service-based subset of the economy the most. Therefore it makes sense that the UK would be hard hit. A “nation of shopkeepers” suffers when the shops are closed...
Really? I'd have thought that stuff like financial, accounting and legal services (things the UK is good at) can be done via work from home rather better than e.g. car and machine parts manufacturing...
Yes, but all the restaurants (lunches), cafe shops (for their coffees during breaks), etc aren't frequented as much because everyone is working from home.
Probably the more clientele in the employee's living neighbourhood doesn't equal it out. While I shop more at the local diary store I don't buy lunches etc.
Probably the more clientele in the employee's living neighbourhood doesn't equal it out. While I shop more at the local diary store I don't buy lunches etc.
The UK doesn't have a uniquely large number of restaurants and cafes, nor are the UK's cafes and restaurants uniquely affected by the lockdowns.
When they say the UK has a strong service industry that drives exports etc they don't mean cafes and bars they mean financial, legal etc services. Those should have stayed strong. I suspect some of the decline is actually Brexit related decline in financial services.
When they say the UK has a strong service industry that drives exports etc they don't mean cafes and bars they mean financial, legal etc services. Those should have stayed strong. I suspect some of the decline is actually Brexit related decline in financial services.
Brexit has been in the works for years and the economy was growing before COVID. The obsession with blaming all misfortune on Brexit is tiring.
The UK is hard hit because it went from a fairly moderate response to swinging hard into a deliberate policy of panicking the population as much as possible. The turning point was Imperial College / Ferguson predicting millions of deaths if there wasn't hard lockdown immediately. The UK's SAGE committee is largely responsible for the resulting devastation, including deaths: they literally told people they had a quasi-patriotic duty to stay away from hospitals. This is almost certainly why England is one of the few places in the world to report excess mortality amongst young adults. They have been opening and re-closing parts of the country with only hours of notice ... given on Twitter. Even Trump hasn't done that.
They even used imagery straight from 28 Days Later:
https://cdni0.trtworld.com/w960/h540/q75/76203_20200408T1313...
This was largely a consequence of SAGE "experts" telling the government they had to deliberately create fear in the population.
Is it any wonder the economy has been crushed when the government deliberately set out to make the population think COVID is the Rage virus?
The UK is hard hit because it went from a fairly moderate response to swinging hard into a deliberate policy of panicking the population as much as possible. The turning point was Imperial College / Ferguson predicting millions of deaths if there wasn't hard lockdown immediately. The UK's SAGE committee is largely responsible for the resulting devastation, including deaths: they literally told people they had a quasi-patriotic duty to stay away from hospitals. This is almost certainly why England is one of the few places in the world to report excess mortality amongst young adults. They have been opening and re-closing parts of the country with only hours of notice ... given on Twitter. Even Trump hasn't done that.
They even used imagery straight from 28 Days Later:
https://cdni0.trtworld.com/w960/h540/q75/76203_20200408T1313...
This was largely a consequence of SAGE "experts" telling the government they had to deliberately create fear in the population.
Is it any wonder the economy has been crushed when the government deliberately set out to make the population think COVID is the Rage virus?
A no deal hard Brexit was not obvious before the last election.
I said a percentage of the decrease. Obviously Brexit has not caused a 20% economic drop.
I said a percentage of the decrease. Obviously Brexit has not caused a 20% economic drop.
In the UK the hospitality industry as whole contributes 3.9% of GDP. Which is higher than similar European economies.
The UK stayed in a deep state of lockdown longer than most other European countries, that's why the relative numbers are bad. Question is, did it work, was it worth it? (saving lives)
This was arguably because the UK fannied around and failed to implement its lockdown early enough, meaning that the resulting lockdown which was required anyway was more impactful than it would have been. Not just economically, but in terms of lives lost.
At the start, they planned to ignore it completely and aim for herd immunity.
Yep, the "conservative" government made a huge economic gamble, hoping it would pay off by not affecting the economy at all. It backfired, costing both jobs and lives.
Herd immunity might still be the only option on the table. The European countries which locked down early did indeed see fewer deaths during that first lockdown, which was the main benefit touted by the folks blaming the UK Government for not locking down sooner, but they're looking at rapid increases in cases again and there doesn't seem to be a plausible endgame.
Is there any evidence herd immunity is feasible at all?
China is not working on herd immunity, they are containing.
Is or was the WHO advocating herd immunity? I can't recall at least.
China is not working on herd immunity, they are containing.
Is or was the WHO advocating herd immunity? I can't recall at least.
The WHO is definitely not advocating herd immunity - most recently they've been calling for everyone to copy New Zealand's success in eliminating the virus right before New Zealand discovered they actually had community transmission. With that we're now pretty much all out of elimination success stories, so I'm not sure what they're going to do next.
Current evidence suggests "herd immunity" is the only feasible option. There seem to be precisely two kinds of places that can successfully lift internal restrictions without a resurgence: tiny islands like Guernsey with closed external borders that can eliminate the virus, and places like New York City, Italy, and possibly parts of Sweden where a substantial proportion of the population has been infected. That's it (and it's entirely plausible the former have just got lucky so far). Between the two is only an endless kind of purgatory countries like the UK and South Korea seem to have ended up in, where testing and tracing and restrictions short of lockdown keep case numbers down but fail to eliminate the disease and can't be lifted because that leads to exponentially growing infections.
Part of the problem is that the press has heavily obfuscated this. For example, they've tried to spin New York City as a success story and an example of flattening the curve working, when in reality it seems to be a perfect demonstration of what a non-flattened curve looks like - including the much sharper decline than that seen in places with lockdowns that did actually flatten the curve and fewer people infected. They've also mislead everyone into thinking that the decline in antibodies in people infected with Covid means they don't have immunity after a few months, when in reality that's not how long-term immunity works at all.
Current evidence suggests "herd immunity" is the only feasible option. There seem to be precisely two kinds of places that can successfully lift internal restrictions without a resurgence: tiny islands like Guernsey with closed external borders that can eliminate the virus, and places like New York City, Italy, and possibly parts of Sweden where a substantial proportion of the population has been infected. That's it (and it's entirely plausible the former have just got lucky so far). Between the two is only an endless kind of purgatory countries like the UK and South Korea seem to have ended up in, where testing and tracing and restrictions short of lockdown keep case numbers down but fail to eliminate the disease and can't be lifted because that leads to exponentially growing infections.
Part of the problem is that the press has heavily obfuscated this. For example, they've tried to spin New York City as a success story and an example of flattening the curve working, when in reality it seems to be a perfect demonstration of what a non-flattened curve looks like - including the much sharper decline than that seen in places with lockdowns that did actually flatten the curve and fewer people infected. They've also mislead everyone into thinking that the decline in antibodies in people infected with Covid means they don't have immunity after a few months, when in reality that's not how long-term immunity works at all.
It isn't even clear if a long lasting immunity in individuals builds up -- first studies indicate the contrary. Without long-term individual immunity no herd immunity can be reached...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/06/19/imm...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/06/19/imm...
There will be way fewer deaths though. Treatment is much better than it was in March. A couple of million people across Europe that would have died without the first lockdown will live if they catch it now.
Also it seems that mild cases don't result in lasting immunity so lasting herd immunity via live infections is impossible.
Also it seems that mild cases don't result in lasting immunity so lasting herd immunity via live infections is impossible.
> because the UK fannied around
Found the brit.
Found the brit.
Yeah, the one major European country with even worse GDP decline than the UK is Spain, which also happened to have what was generally considered to be the strictest lockdown in Europe. Sweden, on the other hand, had a much smaller decrease in GDP despite their economy being heavily reliant on exporting to the rest of Europe.
> Spain, which also happened to have what was generally considered to be the strictest lockdown in Europe.
And also most flouted?
And also most flouted?
Yes, but we also didn't close down our economy nearly as much as most other European countries. I'm just saying that there are too many variables to conclude anything at this point, especially given that we won't have a good guess on "final" death toll until widespread immunity (from vaccine or otherwise).
[deleted]
Recessions aren't "normal times". Despite externalities, whether economic abnormalities, pandemics and so on, it still hits the savings account the same and worth comparing for history's sake.
Money still money
I'm not sure that's true given the current printing press outputs. And even if it is true, the link to official GDP figures is very weak. And even if it weren't, you only have half the GDP figures: we're down X now but we will be up Y when we re-open. If Y>X then we're laughing. And even if all this were not the case, what price a human life and is it a bad thing if for 6m people spend more time at home with their kids being happy but don't spend much?
That's the issue here. One data point, of spurious accuracy, which we fully know and expect to be an outlier is being used to imply an economic trend and that trend is being extended to social trend. I could just as well say "the stock market is up so we are clearly fine"...
That's the issue here. One data point, of spurious accuracy, which we fully know and expect to be an outlier is being used to imply an economic trend and that trend is being extended to social trend. I could just as well say "the stock market is up so we are clearly fine"...
Well.. 'recession' is defined as two consecutive quarterly contractions in GDP. The argument (and I'm not taking a view) is that this is not a good measure for a year like this; that the consumer demand is there, but that the supply is artificially reduced or extinguished (in some sectors more than others).
A proponent of this argument would say it's meaningless - or at least not helpful - to worry about two (or more) quarters of contraction, only to have them followed by stupendous 'growth' once everything's OK and the hibernating demand has somewhere to go.
Someone more critical of it might say Well yes, 'or more', for how long can we hibernate?
A proponent of this argument would say it's meaningless - or at least not helpful - to worry about two (or more) quarters of contraction, only to have them followed by stupendous 'growth' once everything's OK and the hibernating demand has somewhere to go.
Someone more critical of it might say Well yes, 'or more', for how long can we hibernate?
An interesting thing about percentage change in GDP is it's worse on the downside than the upside. If GDP falls 40% one year, then rises 40% next year, it's not back at 100% of what it was before, it's actually only back to 84% (1.4 * 0.6).
I sometimes wonder if using logarithms would be more appropriate in most cases. Then we can simply add up the numbers as one "would expect".
We could choose the base to be ~2.7048138 such that 1% regular growth corresponds to 1% logarithmic growth. For low percentages they would mostly agree. But +40% would become +34% while -40% would become -51%, thus making the combined effect more apparent.
We could choose the base to be ~2.7048138 such that 1% regular growth corresponds to 1% logarithmic growth. For low percentages they would mostly agree. But +40% would become +34% while -40% would become -51%, thus making the combined effect more apparent.
It's one of the reasons why decibels and logarithmic scales are so useful. A drop of -2dB and a gain of +2dB gets you back to where you started.
not only for GDP but also for stocks. People assume if they loose 10% they need a 10% gain but that is not true: https://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2018/11/8/saupload_i...
Easy way to convince people of this: after a 50% fall you need to double (up 100%) to get back to where you started.
There is no hope for the UK, especially the disaster that is the UK tech industry.
After the lockdown is over, people who reside there should get out while they can.
After the lockdown is over, people who reside there should get out while they can.
What? It has the best tech industry in Europe in almost every metric you can think of. Maybe you mean UK outside London which is probably comparable to continental Europe, but London is booming.
> It has the best tech industry in Europe
The UK sold ARM to Softbank, Imagination Technologies to a private equity firm in China, SwiftKey to Microsoft, DeepMind to Google, Deliveroo to Amazon, Dyson has gone to Singapore and most of these startups will not exist in 20, 30 or 40 years time.
The UK's homegrown tech companies are selling out and you think it is still best in Europe? Thanks to Brexit there is no hope.
> but London is booming.
OK, but compared to the UK as a whole, disaster. I expected jobs to flow all through the UK, not be crammed into London where people from other areas have to travel there by train or suffer rent hikes, thankfully this pandemic has put an end to this.
The UK sold ARM to Softbank, Imagination Technologies to a private equity firm in China, SwiftKey to Microsoft, DeepMind to Google, Deliveroo to Amazon, Dyson has gone to Singapore and most of these startups will not exist in 20, 30 or 40 years time.
The UK's homegrown tech companies are selling out and you think it is still best in Europe? Thanks to Brexit there is no hope.
> but London is booming.
OK, but compared to the UK as a whole, disaster. I expected jobs to flow all through the UK, not be crammed into London where people from other areas have to travel there by train or suffer rent hikes, thankfully this pandemic has put an end to this.
You realise that a huge number of US startups also sell out to big tech firms? These companies were at least all actually profitable (except DeepMind).
If selling to a bigger firm is the same thing as failure then Silicon Valley is drowning in failure.
If selling to a bigger firm is the same thing as failure then Silicon Valley is drowning in failure.
Most startups that are being acquired are going to US based companies which benefits the US, so this is a moot point, and I already addressed this:
> ...and most of these startups will not exist in 20, 30 or 40 years time.
> These companies were at least all actually profitable (except DeepMind).
I agree with Dyson but we need more of them. Unfortunately ARM and Imagination technologies have a great history that is now in the hands of foreign companies.
Deliveroo isn't profitable. SwiftKey as AFAIK didn't make money (MS bought them for the AI tech), Powa Technologies (remember them?) hailed as one of the original UK tech unicorn went bust, Blippar is dead. Skyscanner is gone to China and laid off 300 people recently [0], Shazam is gone to Apple.
The situation is so dire OneWeb had to be rescued by the UK government, and they don't even have majority ownership.
What is the UK's answer to FAANG? rather than FAANG coming to the UK? [0]
[0] https://layoffs.fyi/2020/08/12/skyscanner-launches-talent-di...
> ...and most of these startups will not exist in 20, 30 or 40 years time.
> These companies were at least all actually profitable (except DeepMind).
I agree with Dyson but we need more of them. Unfortunately ARM and Imagination technologies have a great history that is now in the hands of foreign companies.
Deliveroo isn't profitable. SwiftKey as AFAIK didn't make money (MS bought them for the AI tech), Powa Technologies (remember them?) hailed as one of the original UK tech unicorn went bust, Blippar is dead. Skyscanner is gone to China and laid off 300 people recently [0], Shazam is gone to Apple.
The situation is so dire OneWeb had to be rescued by the UK government, and they don't even have majority ownership.
What is the UK's answer to FAANG? rather than FAANG coming to the UK? [0]
[0] https://layoffs.fyi/2020/08/12/skyscanner-launches-talent-di...
Aside from maybe Dublin, this seems to be true. Obviously that has to do with synergies of the language alone that gets you a large advantage for your location.
Not sure the UK tech industry is a disaster, I left the UK for France following the Brexit result and it has really opened my eyes to how good it was in the UK.
ARM was sold off on the cheap thanks to Brexit, I can only imagine how other UK companies would fare under Brexit Britain + Pandemic.
Mind weighing in on the pros and cons of your experiences in the UK vs France?
Please expand on this. Are you referring to technical sloppiness, compensation, availability of jobs, something else?
I could write paragraphs on this but I'll keep it short, also bear in mind a lot of it will be due to specific workplaces and so on.
There's some incredible French engineers, but I get the impression a lot of the talent is lost to the US, Canada and the UK. Compensation isn't too dissimilar to the UK or other western European countries. There's still a huge emphasis, especially in larger companies, on where you went to school - if you didn't study at a Grand Ecole you can get snubbed by a lot of people. France is also very conservative when it comes to technology, and often the French bureaucracy leaks into the workplace, I had to have multiple managers sign off my request form to get a HDMI cable.
There's some incredible French engineers, but I get the impression a lot of the talent is lost to the US, Canada and the UK. Compensation isn't too dissimilar to the UK or other western European countries. There's still a huge emphasis, especially in larger companies, on where you went to school - if you didn't study at a Grand Ecole you can get snubbed by a lot of people. France is also very conservative when it comes to technology, and often the French bureaucracy leaks into the workplace, I had to have multiple managers sign off my request form to get a HDMI cable.
Disaster, could you elaborate?
Worst out of all of the G7
Worst out of all of the G7 so far. The US is still yet to manage its coronavirus problems and I suspect that the impact when the US finally manages to tackle this, it will dwarf anything the UK is dealing with.
[deleted]
It's what people demanded. UK is still in semi-lockdown, with only 30% of office workers returning to the office. UK proposed a more relaxed approach at the start but backfired in the public opinion. Now, here's the arithmetic result of forcing people in their homes.
Also, UK relies heavily on services, international business, students, tourism, all heavily hit, so that increases the pain of a travel and mobility freeze.
Also, UK relies heavily on services, international business, students, tourism, all heavily hit, so that increases the pain of a travel and mobility freeze.
With such a massive recession already happening, and talks around Brexit going nowhere, they are really not going to have a nice next 5/10 years.
I have just left the UK, several Europeans I know, working in tech, are doing the same. Not data backed, just personal experience. Maybe this is going to be even tougher than expected. Hopefully not.