We recommend that you
should do your utmost to get your Granny infected now!
The UK Government’s strategy for coronavirus is to resignedly accept that around 80% of people here will catch it. We know that approximately 1% of those infected will die from the disease. This is an awful, terrible number of people.
However, it has been decided that instead of trying to prevent people from becoming infected, the answer is to delay the spread of infection so that the peak is later and more spread out. In this way, the NHS will have more time to prepare for the rise in demand, and the maximum number of intensive care beds needed will be lower, albeit for a longer period.
Looking at the
statistics, most people will be infected, and the bulk of those
infections will happen over the summer, when the NHS is fully
stretched – and then some – trying to cope with the numbers. The
last thing you should be doing is to risk catching it at the same
time as everyone else.
So the answer is to get
the vulnerable infected now, whilst plenty of spaces are available in
intensive care. Why wait until the ICU’s are full to bursting and
you might be receiving treatment in a corridor? Get in early.
Did your Mum take you to a chicken-pox party when you were a child, inflicting an unpleasant, itchy disease on you “for your own good”? Well now is your chance for payback. Ship her out of that old-folks’ home and get her into pubs, clubs, football matches, even the Houses of Parliament. This way, she will be infected and treated before the rush!
You read it here first
– now get out there and infect the old and vulnerable people in
The Green Belt system was created by that great reforming Post-war Government. And like that administration’s other much-loved offspring, the NHS, the general public has massive affection for it.
Fourteen cities in England are restricted from ever greater sprawl by green belts. That has to be a great thing right? We all love our green and pleasant land, so what is not to like? Well quite a lot actually.
By limiting a city’s growth outwards, the inevitable effect is increased population density; more stressful living in ever smaller dwellings and more congestion – and the pollution from more people concentrated in a restricted area.
This increased pressure on land use means that existing green spaces within the city will be slowly lost to development. And so the crammed-in population – who have very little access to the greenbelt farmland – have less natural environment than in a larger, less constrained conurbation. The city loses its lungs.
Limiting the size of a city will increase land prices as people and businesses compete for a scarce resource. So lower added-value work leaves the city to cheaper environs – and the lower skilled are thus forced out too. You really can’t get the staff, dear.
This same increase in land prices, plus the congestion of a termite-hill city, encourages people to commute away from the city, out across the green belt to towns and cities which would otherwise be way beyond the commuter zone.
For example, thousands of people commute into London every day from places as far away as Southampton, Oxford, Coventry and Peterborough. There may be a small element of wanting to live in these places anyway (though not Coventry and Peterborough, obviously). But the real reason is economic. Away from London, a larger house with a garden is so much cheaper that the pain and expense of commuting remains attractive. Imagine all the extra pollution, greenhouse gases and lost productivity from these long-distance travellers. All the London Green Belt has achieved is to move the growth that would have occurred around London to be spread over the whole south-east of England.
Despite the positive image, and just like the NHS, the law of unintended consequence looms large over the green belt. We don’t want to see it abandoned, but it does need to be slackened off a notch or two.