So, and additional circa 800,000 already unemployed plus 3.5 million furloughed, with maybe half ? of those at risk of not having a job to go back to when the dust begins to settle.
As yet, no clear plan of how to get the nation working again and the "hole" getting bigger by the day.

Is it time for some stronger government, helping to identify those industries that can get moving quickly or do we just keep borrowing until this is all over ?

Until demand picks up businesses will not go back whilst ever the furlough scheme is in place. Most business could return very safely it is not difficult - yes will people get within 2 metres of course they will unavoidable 100% of the time - we are humans we like herding. If you cannot get the unions to accept any return to work can never be 100% risk free you have a problem. Waiting for a vaccine is non-runner it is as always an appetite for risk?

Will their be short term 3/4m unemployed very likely but it will be short term I suspect 1.5m structural unemployed in 18 months time.

We are all in a quite precarious position.
If the "lockdown" is eased too much, we will be back to square one, with the virus spreading as it did at the beginning of the outbreak, which would render the pain and economic meltdown of the last few months as wasted and pointless.
Where you do start to wonder about our government strategy is that we were just a few weeks behind Italy but, we look like taking significantly longer to open up to the level that they are currently at ?

Also, regarding the speed at which unemployment may drop, where on earth does your optimism come from ?
Companies are going to go mean and lean until there is some certainty about any 2nd wave and indications from The WHO are that there will be a return of the virus in the winter, which would massively affect any "bounce".

The only positive here will be if Trump continues with his personal drug trials, which will have a positive outcome one way or the other.

I am looking at my own business and we have recovered from 50% early lockdown we now at 75% and I know I am not alone in my sector which suggests that the economy is moving forward. So it doesn't take a huge leap of faith to suggest in 18 months we will be back to where we were.

I think there is a lot of talk about a second wave - this wave will have killed 60k the vast majority of which are elderly with underlying conditions - so that's 60k of 65m yes it is very sad but to suggest a second wave will cause economic meltdown is way off the mark for me. The vast majority of fit working people will be very moderately impacted by the virus.

What will happen is the good businesses will survive and grow - the bad businesses that have dragged the economy back will be gone - no bad thing in opinion. We will be a leaner/meaner workforce - nothing new for me or many well run businesses.

Wow, just wow and for those who have been forced out of business by "lockdown", unlucky eh ??
You seem unable to work out that if the virus numbers start to grow again, we would end up back in lockdown, unless the vaccine is found (and works).

Are their any countries that after relaxing lockdown have had to instigate the same level of lockdown as before?

We have never found a vaccine for a virus of this group - let's start to think of how we live with it?

The numbers will grow but who is dying - are they ones that are going to drive the economy or are they ones that no longer contribute - or they have done their bit?

Have you been foraging for mushrooms again ??

To answer your first point, not yet but, lock down is only just beginning to ease so, it's a little early to decide quite what will happen.

As for who is dying, yes, most seem to have some other underlying health issues but, the world has been in lockdown - to prevent the spread of the virus - therefore, if we are not in lockdown, the virus is likely to begin spreading again.

Surely, if it was neccessary to put the nation / world in lockdown in the first instance, it would likely be necessary to repeat the exercise if the number of cases grew again - if not, then why the hell did everyone go through the pain of the last 10 or so weeks.

Many of these countries have been out of lockdown almost as long as we have been in - why did we have lockdown, because death of any nature is not acceptable to our culture - we must prevent death at all cost. In Sweden no lockdown and it has gone a lot better than it has for us.

Oh dear, wrong twice

We had lockdown, not because "death of any nature is not acceptable to our culture" but, to try and prevent our health system being over run with critical cases - you know, where they dont treat anyone because there just isn't room.

As for Sweden, they have certainly gone a different route and although their death rate is higher than ours (per 100,000 people), they have kept their ecconomy going AND of course, unlike the rest of us, there is no risk of a spike in deaths post lockdown, which puts them ahead in the "race" back to normality.
However, you have to look a little deeper into their population to see why they havent been affected "too badly".
They have a relatively small overall population in a relatively large country, far less densely populated than the UK and no cities of the size and density of say, London.
Add to that the huge percentage of people living by themselves, which prevents the virus spreading as quickly and they have, of course used social distancing, further reducing the spread.

If you look at places like London, with a huge number of people, ln a tight geographical area, plus the added pressures of the daily commute, it's not difficult to see why the virus grew quickly in that area and will do once more if the same numbers are on the move again.

That’d be the Sweden who, in the last week, have had more deaths per capita than any other European country. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... KKBN22V26V

That’d be the Sweden who, in the last week, have had more deaths per capita than any other European country. https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... KKBN22V26V