COVID19

[Jon MW]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

[kukushkin88]

Looks like him saying "I've been warning about coronavirus for a while" could have been a fabrication too.

https://t.co/g8ZMPo4GUJ

This goes beyond party politics. We are in the middle of a pandemic. We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. And the people at the very top are lying to us live on television. How is this acceptable?

In terms of the Civil Service Code of Conduct, it’s quite unbelievable that he used that platform to brag about his genius in foreseeing this. Incredible that he thought he’d get something so clearly untrue through, to an audience of millions.

[Cf]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

Ok. I don't know the response of all 200 countries. Fair enough. Of all the developed countries though we are near the bottom of the list on most metrics are we not? I don't see many reports citing our response as a success story.

[kukushkin88]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

It’s incredible how defensive you are on this. Let’s limit to suitably comparable countries and then do:
Most dead people
Most dead people per capita
Most dead healthcare professionals
Most excess deaths as a % increase of all mortality to 5 year average
Most people dead without going to hospital
(We’ll need to wait on full data but try and pick one where you’re feeling good about our situation)

The don’t be mean to , he was trying his best and we were just unlucky, is getting to be a tired argument.

[kukushkin88]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

It’s incredible how defensive you are on this. Let’s limit to suitably comparable countries and then do:
Most dead people
Most dead people per capita
Most dead healthcare professionals
Most excess deaths as a % increase of all mortality to 5 year average
Most people dead without going to hospital
(We’ll need to wait on full data but try and pick one where you’re feeling good about our situation)

The don’t be mean to , he was trying his best and we were just unlucky, is getting to be a tired argument.

I’ll find the archived version for people that don’t have the subscription:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/three-weeks-of-dither-and-delay-on-coronavirus-that-cost-thousands-of-british-lives-05sjvwv7g

[kukushkin88]

One thing that’s been amazing about the ‘cut through’ of people who weren’t interested getting involved because of Cummings, is that people really think the number of U.K. deaths is ‘around 37,000’. That’s an unbelievable failure of government comms and the media.

[Jon MW]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

Ok. I don't know the response of all 200 countries. Fair enough. Of all the developed countries though we are near the bottom of the list on most metrics are we not? I don't see many reports citing our response as a success story.

I don't like over generalisations.

Technically what you said wasn't an over generalisation - objectively the worst could 'technically' mean one of the worst 100 (for example), but I sensed that wasn't exactly what you meant.

I think any kind of analysis can show how countries could have responded better, but in general I think countries can only really be judged on whether their response was reasonable at the time.

More than one response is probably reasonable at the time. So if comparable countries did different things, they might both have been behaving reasonably but with very different outcomes. The UK might well come out as one of the worst, but only as a matter of days - whether we could have done some things a week earlier for example.

But putting in place measures to stop the virus can work both ways. There are some countries which have implemented very strict national lockdowns when some of their regions have zero cases and travel bans to stop cases arriving in those regions - is it objectively good that they are forcing people to self isolate and destroying their livelihoods in those areas? There are some countries with legally, strict lockdowns but national politicians openly telling people it's an over reaction and to ignore it - which they are doing.

Excess mortality is always going to be the best way to measure the result, but as mentioned before, some countries were never going to be hit badly by this virus no matter what they did. Some countries having 100 deaths instead of 10 deaths will be a poor result.

Coming back to your original statement, the gist of it may well be correct, it just seemed a bit reductive and over simplified for a very complicated situation.

[Cf]

... We objectively have one of the worst responses to it in the world. ...

There are nearly 200 countries in the world - how many of that 200 do you know what their response has been?

Ok. I don't know the response of all 200 countries. Fair enough. Of all the developed countries though we are near the bottom of the list on most metrics are we not? I don't see many reports citing our response as a success story.

I don't like over generalisations.

Technically what you said wasn't an over generalisation - objectively the worst could 'technically' mean one of the worst 100 (for example), but I sensed that wasn't exactly what you meant.

I think any kind of analysis can show how countries could have responded better, but in general I think countries can only really be judged on whether their response was reasonable at the time.

More than one response is probably reasonable at the time. So if comparable countries did different things, they might both have been behaving reasonably but with very different outcomes. The UK might well come out as one of the worst, but only as a matter of days - whether we could have done some things a week earlier for example.

But putting in place measures to stop the virus can work both ways. There are some countries which have implemented very strict national lockdowns when some of their regions have zero cases and travel bans to stop cases arriving in those regions - is it objectively good that they are forcing people to self isolate and destroying their livelihoods in those areas? There are some countries with legally, strict lockdowns but national politicians openly telling people it's an over reaction and to ignore it - which they are doing.

Excess mortality is always going to be the best way to measure the result, but as mentioned before, some countries were never going to be hit badly by this virus no matter what they did. Some countries having 100 deaths instead of 10 deaths will be a poor result.

Coming back to your original statement, the gist of it may well be correct, it just seemed a bit reductive and over simplified for a very complicated situation.

That's fair, and I accept it to a point. But sometimes we need to be able to use the condensed version. Saying "it's complicated" can't be a reason to not bring up the simplified version - we can't fully cover every single topic every time.

[Cf]

First minister resignation:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52806086

[kukushkin88]

The second comment from none other than Nick Ferrari is pure gold:

https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1265184505905766403?s=21

If he can’t get hold the line in terms right vs left, being more important than right vs wrong, then the right/wrong side of the argument is falling apart.

[Jon MW]

I'm never keen on vox pops but I thought the answers in this thread give an interesting insight on how people from other countries are viewing the measures their governments are taking (nearly all of them are answering the question basically with - my one)
https://www.quora.com/What-country-has-the-most-insane-Coronavirus-strategy

[kukushkin88]

I'm never keen on vox pops but I thought the answers in this thread give an interesting insight on how people from other countries are viewing the measures their governments are taking (nearly all of them are answering the question basically with - my one)
https://www.quora.com/What-country-has-the-most-insane-Coronavirus-strategy

Which only strengthens the argument for sticking to things that we can measure.

[neeko]

The UK has opened its schools, cafes, shops etc etc later than most of Europe, I am not sure that proves we are doing a better job.

China locked the doors of tower blocks to ensure its lockdown was good, not sure that the UK not doing that made them worse.

The UKs 2 errors were
1.  “protect the NHS” rather than kill as few people as possible, and
2. too late a lockdown.

Keeping more patients in hospital and running out of ICU beds in a few hospitals around the country would have been better than emptying hospitals then have everyone die in care homes. But politics and the press has canonised the NHS to such an extent that it was more important to kill extra people than have hospitals running at 100%+ capacity.

[Jon MW]

I'm never keen on vox pops but I thought the answers in this thread give an interesting insight on how people from other countries are viewing the measures their governments are taking (nearly all of them are answering the question basically with - my one)
https://www.quora.com/What-country-has-the-most-insane-Coronavirus-strategy

Which only strengthens the argument for sticking to things that we can measure.

If we can avoid the temptation to try and stick things into league tables then a bit of broader knowledge of other countries might help give a more generalised perspective.

Left and Right echo chambers are easy to fall into, but the US/Europe echo chamber is very difficult to avoid.

Hearing what a few random Armenian/Indian/Argentians (etc) think can help increase your understanding of the world in a way that a random vox pop in your own country won't.

It reminds me of a book I read which used the same idea about literature, it was a book containing stories from writers from different countries to give an idea about their perspective on literature in their country. But I can't remember what the book was called so that's not too helpful a comparison I realise.

[kukushkin88]

I'm never keen on vox pops but I thought the answers in this thread give an interesting insight on how people from other countries are viewing the measures their governments are taking (nearly all of them are answering the question basically with - my one)
https://www.quora.com/What-country-has-the-most-insane-Coronavirus-strategy

Which only strengthens the argument for sticking to things that we can measure.

If we can avoid the temptation to try and stick things into league tables then a bit of broader knowledge of other countries might help give a more generalised perspective.

Left and Right echo chambers are easy to fall into, but the US/Europe echo chamber is very difficult to avoid.

Hearing what a few random Armenian/Indian/Argentians (etc) think can help increase your understanding of the world in a way that a random vox pop in your own country won't.

It reminds me of a book I read which used the same idea about literature, it was a book containing stories from writers from different countries to give an idea about their perspective on literature in their country. But I can't remember what the book was called so that's not too helpful a comparison I realise.

The international comparison tables aren’t going anywhere. It will be a unique opportunity in our lifetimes to identify what constitutes good governance.

Pokerpops will be along soon, to thank you for the fact that Quora polls with 25 responses, are now the gold standard for assessing government response to Coronavirus. He will also be delighted with the finding that they’re all the worst, by this measure.