Four days until the bloody crime and bloody revolt starts. Meanwhile, Waitrose this morning was well-stocked. Even got some eggs and could have bought toilet roll!
Another one of your troll efforts. I feel I have a slight duty of care towards you these days, like a therapist. They are always two or three weeks away, they just need a push. eg. when the economic situation goes down the pan.
While the Bloody revolt is showing no signs of happening, the Corona virus claimed the life of a healthy 21 year old woman in the UK yesterday. Imagine how many healthy, young people would lose their lives if we kept the economy fully open. Frightening. Deepest sympathies with the family in this awful time.
You people have no idea what's going to happen with the unemployment and economic collapse, it is going to be absolutely huge (all the experts agree) but you continue to mock what I wrote last week at this very early stage.
Ten days ago you said we were 'only a couple of weeks' from 'bloody crime and bloody revolt.' And that this would be carried out by 'the bottom ten percent.' The bottom ten percent are somewhere in the region of 6.7m people. That's millions and millions of people who are now, according to you, four days away from 'bloody crime and bloody revolt.' But, as I'm absolutely certain you are now aware, this does not look remotely likely. And what's this? You've changed your tune to say they're 'always' a few weeks away? So please, can you clarify what you meant by 'the bottom 10% are only a couple of weeks away from bloody crime and bloody revolt' because it looks like you meant that the bottom 10% were only a couple of weeks away from bloody crime and bloody revolt?
And you do? What are your qualifications on this again? I'm not trolling by the way; I'm just looking at your end of days posts and seeing where they fit now that we're ten days down the line. Early days but after round one Unforgiven is already looking a little out of his depth.
I clarified it several pages back, several days ago. You seem not to have been reading or following what I wrote in those posts then, yet you blindly and insistently argued with me.
I've read everything you've written. It's clear your tactic is to try and obfuscate - ('I've already answered that') rather than address the points. I've taken your own words and, lets face it, made you look very silly with all your talk of society being destroyed and millions upon millions being made to die. We now approach your first prediction (you got it completely wrong by the way) and rather just say 'you know, I was wrong' you carry on trying to pretend you've got some sort of intellectual high ground. I fully expect that if this really does blow over with some but minimal impact then by Christmas you'll stand by every word about millions dying because 'one day the world will end.'
If any of you actually want to consider what I was getting at, check out what Professor Philip Thomas (one of the leading Risk Management academics in the world) of Bristol University said : [url]https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1260175/coronavirus-uk-warning-economic-crisis-death-toll-covid-19-latest-update[/url] More years of life will be lost in the UK if the GDP shrinks by more than 6.4% (which is possible with the current situation) than the virus would take.
Problem with that is 'if' GDP shrinks is a maybe, but the loss of life if we do nothing is a definite. Why would anyone unless they were insane take the secondary option? Also, do you read the Daily Express? That would explain a lot.
These viruses are bad for your health - had a one nighter a few years ago and my knob was out of action for one month.
I posted this on March 17th, clarifying the exact statement already : My actual words : "the bottom 10% are only a couple of weeks away from bloody crime and bloody revolt." ...... which I think is actually not much different from what is broadly true at any given time. The poorest 10% don't have more than two or three weeks food in their cupboards, they don't have more than two or three weeks rent money in their banks, they don't have the cushion, the safety net. Some of the bottom 10% are already criminals, and more will fall into that as times get harder. And if mass unemployment occurs and the colleges and schools close down putting students and apprentices in limbo, the welfare benefits will become very slow to be processed. Even when they get their money, with the panic buying and hoarding, who's to say there's much available left in the shops for them to provide for themselves. These are just basic societal realities, I'm not sure what your problem is. What I'm saying is far from scaremongering. I mean, come on, have a sense of perspective. People are saying the virus will kill 1 million, and I'm saying the poorest 10% are a desperate bunch if the economy is shut down or crashes ... and you're calling me a scaremonger and a ranter for that ? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take it or leave it, TonyHayers.
Obviously, if they calculate the likely GDP fall to more than 6.4% the second option becomes reasonable-to-desirable. Estimates in the likely fall of GDP are rising by the day it seems, a recent initial study model came up with 4.2% but the people who did that have already said that seems a gross underestimate. No, but Professor Philip Thomas was quoted there (as well as others) after he spoke on the BBC.
