Chach

14 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

false, amazon has 50+ physical stores

 

https://www.cnet.com/news/amazon-now-operates-seven-different-kinds-of-physical-stores-heres-why/

Jesus, I never even realised they'd branched into food. They need to be stopped (broken up) before they take over the world.

18 hours ago, Palfy said:

1) What you both seem to not understand is what keeps the economy going which is people working and spending their earnings in the country they live, if you believe that British companies will wholesale take their jobs to countries with cheaper labour rates, which would then leave them with no end users  in the country they trade in to sell their products or services to, because people won’t have jobs or the finances to buy their products or services then I’m stunned, and I think any government would introduce laws and penalties to stop any mass exodus of jobs in a global down turn of the magnitude you see for the future, even a Tory government wouldn’t standby an allow that to happen. 
But in reality none of us will ever really know until it happens. 
 

2) And also wouldn’t it be better now more than ever to be in the biggest free trading block in the world, that also has powers to make sure by consensus of 28 members to make laws that companies would have to adhere to if they wished to trade with the biggest trade block in the world. 

1) Who said anything about British companies? What even is a British company now if anything other than in name, companies are looking to sell their products to the world.

The future is online, borders are going to become less and less relevant particularly in the service industry. Look at Automaticc, billion dollar company started by a guy who is still only 36 now, 1200 employees in 70 countries and no offices. Amazon are the biggest retailer in the world, don't have a single shop, Facebook, Google etc the high street is over.  Within a generation no one will be going to the supermarket to do their shopping in person.

The ship has sailed mate and Brexit will bring a little back but not very much.

2) At some stage you are going to have to decide if you're a free market neo-liberal or a left winger, left wingers do not rue the end of the European Union. 

14 minutes ago, Matt said:

I meant more mechanical automation, AI isn’t something I know a lot about or pretend to understand. But the principle is the same; expertise won’t necessarily be with the people doing the current work, but it will create more possibilities than it takes away. It’s been true of most technological advances over the long term.

I guess I over-generalized a bit, but back to remote working; from my experience and knowledge it is a positive thing. It all depends on how the local governments develop the growth. Considering the UK has gone for a “me first” approach, I don’t see them letting companies outsource as much out of the country and will encourage companies to keep the jobs in-house (so to speak). Business will save massively on things like rent, taxes, some benefits (I know companies who help with public transport for example), travel expenses... there’s more money to be made and saved than making very expensive and potentially risky outsourcing transitions 

It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if the government didnt do any of this to encourage businesses to do this though. 

Sorry for rambling, got a 5 year old climbing all over me asking to play...

Yeah I don't think experts are as unanimously bullish about the AI technology boom creating jobs like previous technology booms, drivers of cars and trucks are going to be the first jobs to go which is the job pretty much anyone can currently get, obviously there will be a lot of new jobs for people who know how to code but they're not going to be the people who lose the driver jobs and we already have serious problems inequality now.

Regards to WFH I personally don't like it so pretty biased, I like the interaction and camaraderie with workmates and I only live 3km from the office so spend no time commuting/in traffic.

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

I didn’t say it created for those it put out of work. I said it creates new jobs for others. 

Can you elaborate on this then "This won’t change things for the worse, it will make things better"

So far I've only seen this lead to some fairly bad political outcomes and worse working conditions, which is going to get a whole lot worse when artificial intelligence is added to the equation and neither labour nor brain is required.

Not saying we should stop progress, just think we should have our eyes open to the realities of creating a new underclass with no place for them in the economy.

14 minutes ago, Matt said:

Automation is another good example of moving jobs from one job type to creating others. 

What type of jobs do you think automation created for the people it put out of work?

I'd say its almost certainly untrue, they've been trying to rein these things in for years and you'd hope this event is the straw than broke the camels back.

56 minutes ago, RPG said:

Straight from the left wing play book.

I thought the complete opposite, start with number 1:

The job you were told couldn't be done remotely, can be done remotely. 

No thinking left winger with a basic understanding of Keynesian economics would want to abandon working in offices, the amount of indirect jobs lost from that transition would make the closing of the coal mines look like The Sound of Music.

Unfortunately when corporations do discover that the job can be done remotely, stage 2 will that job being done in a 2nd world country by someone who will do it for a fraction of the salary.

32 minutes ago, Matt said:

She might’ve said she’d put it first, but would’ve dilly-dallied just as long whilst surrounding herself with incompetents rather than exceptionalists. The message that we can do it better than anyone was sent out years ago with the referendum.

I think Boris was using the “keep calm and carry on” approach to buy time because it was the only tool he had available. He fucked up just as pretty much any politician would’ve considering the mess the Tory’s have created over a decade. 

"Virus means Virus!" would have been better than "Get Virus Done!" to be fair.

5 hours ago, MikeO said:

Horrific times for people going through cancer treatment (wearing my Macmillan hat); some being told that chemo is too risky due to the damage to the immune system and some having radiotherapy periods reduced from 6/7 weeks to four because of the risk of going to hospital. People are dying from covid but people will also die from insufficient cancer treatment due to it.

This is the kind of systemic failure that leads me to believe there is no actual plan.

If you don't have a plan to treat cancer patients in an event as foreseeable as this then thats a huge failure of planning.

There doesn't even seem to be a plan for the  other at risk, the diabetics, the asthmatics/people with other respiratory diseases. etc.

14 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Well you haven’t changed mine, and the world working together can achieve more than you give it credit for. 
Food and medicine are essential making cars and building houses aren’t for a year,  along with many other activities which are still happening. 
What a pointless comparison in Zimbabwe how is there any comparison to what Zimbabwe did to itself unilaterally, to what’s happening now globally, the world can help each other financially to get over this, people’s lives will be effected financially, but ask anyone who loses a family member or a good friend what’s more important saving life’s or saving a life style, you seem to think that by stopping non essential companies and trying to save every life possible the world is going to end, well don’t worry it won’t you’re taxes may go up for a number of years, you’re pension will most definitely take a big hit, but you and your family will stand a better chance to survive this which is a bonus better than being the richest man in the graveyard, because you were scared to take the tough decisions because they may or may not impact on you in a years time. 
My belief is you do what’s right now even if it has financial implications, and if that causes problems further down the line you cross them bridges when you get to them, but you don’t leave people behind to die to pay for your future  

And I don’t want try to change your mind if you can live with your decision not try and save everyone possible because of costs, then we are poles apart  

 

Honestly Palfy, you've said absolutely fuck all there. The world will not run on platitudes.

Google the word "dialectic" then have a good hard look at yourself.

46 minutes ago, Palfy said:

 what the world would look like in a years time 

This is what I am interested in, I am not advocating for anything except what the best solution for everyone might look like.

What I do know is that our economies and financial systems have been evolving for about 10k years since the discovery of agriculture, there's certain things we need to sustain life and we have a monetary system whereby we exchange labour/time/products to get the money to buy the things we need to sustain life for ourselves and our loved ones.

It's not a perfect system because it's human but it's the one we have.

Out of that system the government takes a share redistributes it to where they think its best used to maintain things, provide a welfare safety net for people who can't get money to buy things that sustain life and to provide public services.

The thing about money is that it's not a real thing, it's a social construct and it's only worth something if you have a good system where people think your money's worth something, see Zimbabwe* for what happens when people think it's not.

If we were to stop all non essential economic activity (food and medicine) for a year the governments revenue will be decimated, governments raise money other than from tax through the issuing of debt, who would buy the debt of a country with no economy*? 

People will definitely die under that scenario also. 

We currently have a pandemic and a GFC 2.0 and currently we're staying at home, it's a good idea to slow the spread of the virus because sick people are unproductive anyway but what is the actual plan?

I don't think we can hide from it for a year without social unrest the likes of which we have never seen before, change my mind.

1 minute ago, Palfy said:

Are you advocating letting people die until a vaccine is found because that is the cheaper option, and in this country my friend there are more pensioners living below or just above the poverty line that don’t form part of your so called richest generation. 
Obviously this may not be the case in Australia. 

How many times are you going to dodge the question Palfy,?

Lay off the emotional mind reading and lay it out:

If our strategy is that we should stop at nothing to save every single life  no matter what the cost, what does it look like assuming a vaccine is 1 year away.

18 minutes ago, Palfy said:

We’ve pretty much heard that from our PM but he is still allowing non essential workers and their companies to operate, thus spreading the virus further that’s not the love we require from any politician Tory or otherwise. 

The NZ lockdown is nothing like the UK one.

https://covid19.govt.nz/government-actions/covid-19-alert-level/essential-businesses/

37 minutes ago, Palfy said:

do you think that people who have the powers to stop this really care about a few hundred thousand old people who can be taken off the social care program if they die. 

Given our entire financial system is pretty much geared up to the passing of wealth from the younger generations to the older generations, who are probably the richest generation who have ever lived on this planet, I am thinking all evidence points to them caring.

So as a thought experiment lay it out for me, if our strategy is that we should stop at nothing to save every single life  no matter what the cost, what does it look like assuming a vaccine is 1 year away.

This is the Prime Minister of New Zealand going live on FB the first night of their lockdown for all those who feel they're not getting the love they need from their Tory politicians.

5 hours ago, Palfy said:

The government said that the biggest problem for the country in the coming year’s, was finding the budget to look after the needs of the elderly and infirm, they have now found the solution let them die. 

Its can't be good for your mental health to go around thinking half of the population have a psychopathology that results in them being indifferent to the death of their elder relatives, Palfy.

6 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Orange Man Bad

Not an argument.

6 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

SARS and MERS are still doing the rounds. SARS is currently doing the rounds again besides this particular SARS-Cov2 being a pandemic.

There's vaccines at the final hurdle of human testing for SARS1stopped for want of finance and no sense of the danger.

4 hours ago, Palfy said:

What is so difficult for the government to force companies and individuals to stay at home unless they are a key to the welfare of the country. 
Firstly changing your policy mid stream hasn’t helped. 
Secondly still allowing companies and people to make there own choices. 
Thirdly not using powers to punish companies and people who break the rules.
Weak government will cost thousands of people their lives, and the shuttling of the door after the horse has bolted should be a crime in itself, we are weeks behind the strongest measures that should have and in some cases still haven’t been taken. 
Are builders still allowed to go to work if working on none essential projects, yes the government have repeated, why ?thousands have asked and been given a none coherent answer from all ministers who are trying to defend it. 
Warehouses open for the picking of clothes and furniture again why ?because this government is allowing them to operate. 
I don’t see a strong and decisive government far from it I see a weak government devoid of the backbone and strength of its convictions to lockdown completely. 

I've seen this argument a fair bit but it never lays out what is behind door number two, we're a year away minimum from a vaccine. Under the total lockdown, how does it play out?

6 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

BREAKING: Coronavirus has contracted Boris Johnston

Fixed.

9 hours ago, Palfy said:

I have had to close my carpentry business today nearly 70 people laid off 7 of which are PAYE who I will carry on paying 80% of their salaries to through the government scheme. 
It’s the self employed I’m most concerned for as the chancellor still hasn’t come up with a solution for the 1.5 million self employed in this country, we have heard that he will be making an announcement in the next day or so, he needs to get on with it and make it good. 
We have been told this is initially going to be for 3 weeks but we are expecting it to be more like 3 months. 
Personally I’m good with it just a shame I can’t go to Spain for 2-3 months, I’ve got a few things going on out there at the moment and it would have been nice being out there to keep an eye on it. 
But I’m at the moment fit and healthy as I hope this finds you, your family and friends, and that’s all that matters in time’s like this. 

Is that because construction sites have closed down or were you servicing the general public?

2 hours ago, Cornish Steve said:

Trump may have tested negative, but Rand Paul is the first US senator to test positive. This is the guy who voted against the government offering free testing and financial support to those affected.

I hope he plans to pull himself up by his bootstraps and invent his own vaccine/treatments.

In the context of Corona Virus is there a way back for Bernie that outweighs the risk of a protracted primary process?

It's bold.

On 15/03/2020 at 00:32, MikeO said:

I don't see him as "bad"; I just see him as a fool and a narcissist. As I mentioned a few posts back, he's in serious need of psychological help, and I'm not joking about it I'm perfectly serious.

He's implying you have Trump Derangement Syndrome and Trump has done nothing wrong and you can't see straight because of your hatred of him.

It's pretty much the only response to genuine criticism of him now because he's so far gone with the handling of this virus that there's no defence.