Main Edition
US
FR
October 21, 2020 - 7:00am
Officially, it’s a tiered ‘alert’ system. But, let’s call it what it really is: a tiered lockdown system — which is why Greater Manchester is so reluctant to move up to tier 3.
It’s right that the severity of lockdown in each area should vary with the Covid facts on the ground, but the problem is that there isn’t a similarly objective system of financial support. The ad hoc haggling between central and local government threatens to disrupt the Covid response — while driving a wedge between the Government and its new friends in the North.
What’s needed is a system for automatically directing stimulus funds to whichever local economies are under the heaviest restrictions. That won’t be cheap, of course — but compared to letting cities and regions suffer long-term, structural damage, it’s the least worst option.
So, how best to provide that geographically-specific shot in the arm? One way would be to put money directly into people’s pockets depending on where they live. However, while this might help with household finances, it won’t help the wider local economy if the cash ends up sitting in savings accounts or drains away to Amazon.
Any ‘helicopter drop’ of money needs to be spent soon — and spent locally. The Eat Out to Help Out scheme was a dry run for the principle of directing stimulus funds to a chosen target; in this case to a particular sector. Other countries have trialled systems for directing spending money to particular places.
Reporting for This Is Money, George Nixon writes about a scheme in the Chinese city of Shenzhen. Last week, 50,000 people were randomly selected to receive 200 yuan (£23) which was transferred to them via a mobile app. With that money, they were allowed to spend it in thousands of local shops by scanning a QR code.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeNo point helicoptering money until the shops open and people are back to the offices. I’m saving £150 on travel per month but probably double that on not buying coffees and lunches. (Yes, I could have packed lunches but I didn’t). We also haven’t been to a restaurant since Feb.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem, which is not lack of funds, but the forced closure of businesses. There is a case for compensating the firms the state has compelled to stop operating or to operate at reduced capacity, and the workers who’ve lost jobs as a result. But this is not demand management, but reimbursing government mandated losses.
The rise in household saving has been more than matched by the increase in government dissaving (i.e. borrowing and printing money to finance spending), but in any case the problem is not lack of demand, but suppressed supply.
This is not the plan. The plan is for the oligarchs to consolidate nearly all wealth, power, and resources. This is necessary for “the great reset”. They will dictate the terms of our new life. Currently they are winning. The people are losing. Time is running out. This is “The Great Leap Forward”.
https://www.thenation.com/a…
https://www.techspot.com/ne…
No, we need Tier Sweden. Or, even better, Tier Florida.
Apparently there are no more people dying than is normal at this time of year. Indeed, 19 fewer people died last week than in the same week last year!
It is simply that a few very old people – average age 82.4 – are dying of (or probably with) Covid instead of the normal flu or whatever. Meanwhile we destroy the economy and utterly ruin the last few weeks and months of people in care homes etc who cannot see their families. It’s not often that I would recommend a Nick Cohen article, but read his piece in The Spectator on this subject.
Last year in the week in question 1620 people died of respiratory illnesses. This year it was 1621 including covd 19. Is this now a mouse casting a big shadow? I’m no fan of Trump, he’s a bit of a loon but in March he made one very good statement….the cure can’t be worse than the disease.
Excess deaths in the home are however a national scandal on the scale of care homes but will get almost no focus at all as it’s outside the narrative.
The point you seem to be missing here, Fraser, is that deaths may be the same as they were this time last year, but that’s with fairly severe anti-COVID measures (rule of six, two-metre distancing, masks) in place across the whole country and even more severe ones in various localities. If none of those measures were in place, there’s every chance the death rate would be significantly higher.
Indeed!
Don’t know about that Fraser. My local teaching hospital is so full it is closing down everything except urgent cancer treatment. They are filling a ward every week with Covid patients. That’s not a few old people!
With treatment they can save a lot of people who are mostly younger. Doesn’t mean the illness doesn’t exist.