Was it a satisfactory answer to your question?

Joke isn’t it lol

This is quite the hot take; RL fails to develop outside the heartlands, because socialism.

That will take some beating.

Probably not, to be fair.

It is both more interesting and more difficult to discuss stuff with people you disagree with than those with whom you agree.




It’s an answer, sorta, and I’d miss ‘em if they all effed off to their echo chamber and left us in ours. The mutual horror does all good, I reckon.

How long do you think it is going to take to wash out the impact of some guy in China who liked eating bats? If we are still not feeling the impact of this in 10 years I will be very surprised.

It was not a criticism of Labour - I know you lefties are very sensitive to any poke in the ribs

Global issues like this takes years to overcome.

Thank God they have all that PPE you bought them - they need something to pin it to

Nobody would have got this 100% correct - something on this scale has never happened before - so your expectations were unrealistic.

All politicians tell lies - Blair told us there were WMD!! - so just for once give them some slack.

The captains of industry like Bren2k were slow to react - he thinks he is the greatest!! so what chance have simple - no very simple public servants have of coping - nil. It is no surprise that is it the private sector that is coming up with quick innovative solutions - your beloved public sector simply isn't that agile.

Could we have done things - of course we could - this is balance between short term public health and longer term economic health - do we sacrifice the well being of millions longer term to save ten of thousands short term - you think you are a one stop panacea for what's right - so come clever clogs what would you have done?

Told you what I would have done - isolate the vulnerable continue as normal - don't wreck the economy for what wouldn't have been a lot different to a normal year of flu deaths. Harsh yes but if you had ever run a business you would know you have to make decisions that protect the majority.

Sat in your lofty seat I would have thought that was bloody obvious - especially to an intellectual colossus like you (sic) very easy to stand outside the fire

You do remember saying this wasn't going to be anything near as bad as the 2007 banking crisis dont you, after all, it was about 3 weeks ago.

Was it a Bat or a Pangolin - it's increddible what really poor people have to eat isn't it.
Others have to drink dirty, contaminated water.

Talking of the financial crisis, I read the Big Short recently. Some of the structural flaws in the system were ridiculous.

When the banks pulled together loads of rotten loans from different sources into bonds and their derivatives, they were able to get AAA ratings because they were ‘diversified’. And, y’know, they were paying Moody’s and S&P who were in competition to earn fees for providing the ratings. US federal bank regulators, of which there were several including the wonderfully-named Office of Thrift Supervision, did not receive a government budget, instead competing with each other to gain funding from the banks they regulated, with lax supervision being a selling point.

Increasingly, I don’t think economic and societal success, however measured, is so much about socialism versus capitalism, as it is about about avoiding (or at least minimising), in any system, loopholes, inconsistencies, bad incentives and structural defects that will be exploited for narrow benefit at wider cost.