Fallout - A Post Wuhan Coronavirus World


Does that mean that the only premises needed by these multi nationals into the future would be a production facility (in Dells case) and a registered office for tax putposes?

Presumably all those Google and Facebook techies could do their job from India or China (assuming connectivity) rather than having to physicaly move to Grand Canal Dock.

If so, thats a further hit for local consumption, rents etc etc.


Dell have been pushing people into remote working for over a decade and it’s always been about sectoral cost savings without looking at the whole. Remember this is the company that bought VMware and EMC at exactly the wrong time for obscene amounts of money and then went private in order to hide the embarrassment on wall street. I worked for them in the 00’s and I can tell you penny pinching is the culture, remember Dell started as a low cost PC manufacturer and became successful by establishing a negative cost conversion cycle, paying suppliers 90 days after you got your PC, no innovation, no new tech, BIOS development shipped to China in the 90’s, yes they are remarkable if you are viewing supply chain, logistics and marketing. If you go looking you will probably see a similar article every year.


You know, that didn’t occur to me but now you mention it, that probably is exactly what it means.

Our corporation tax will attract them but with all this working from home stuff of the future , we wont benefit from their workers being here paying taxes and spending their income in the local economy. Then again local customers often prefer local support for cultural reasons.

I can see this benefitting the UK at our expense as presumably the big multinationals sell far more kit there than here and the Dutch and Germans seem hellbent on breaking up the Eurozone right now so that benefit may expire too.

Doesn’t bode well for us really.


In general people who WFH will have more spending power in their localities, so regional restaurants for example, will see an increase in future customers as it will only be a few minutes down the road as opposed to long drive home followed by another drive to the restaurant.

The biggest losers will be, of course these “centres of excellence” that have popped up all over Dublin sucking in people from ridiculous distances just so they can all sit in the same building and be “managed”.


With regard to working from home are the “bosses” happy about it?

Middle management are losing their status and senior management may be seeing a drop in productivity? Mightyz mentions people not being available during the day. All the people that swanned around the office having meetings - how do they justify their existence?

I can definitely see shared accommodation and accommodation without its own outside space becoming a lot less popular. Many people might try to insource their childcare with aupairs etc, especially if there’s a lot of “language students” who don’t have hospitality work.

The economy needs new “luxuries” to mop up spending, with no bars, restaurants, foreign holidays etc. Even the personal care industry will suffer if we have more social distancing, nailbars, reiki healers etc etc. What will the monied class spend on?


In terms of the scale of unintended consequences:

One thing is clear, never let your health service run your country and fight the war.


What’s another year… ah now I get why Johnny Logan was trending on twitter! :icon_eek:

A former state epidemiologist for Sweden has claimed Ireland’s coronavirus lockdown is pushing the serious cases into the future.

Dr Johan Giesecke has also claimed the Irish approach is “destroying the fabric” of our society and economy.

Sweden has never gone into full lockdown - instead opting for a ‘soft’ approach.

They are keeping shops and restaurants open, and relying on people limiting their contact with other people.

Over 3,500 people have died there, but the hope is most of the population would be immune if there is a second wave.

Dr Giesecke, who is advising the Swedish government on its approach, told Newstalk Breakfast it is a better approach than the path Ireland is taking.

"One example is your neighbour the United Kingdom: they have more deaths per million inhabitants than Sweden has.

“The other is that what you do is you push your cases into the future - many people will get infected once you open the lockdown”.

"But you can’t keep a lockdown in Ireland for a year, that would be impossible."

He said he believes ultimately everyone will get the virus: "That’s true for all respiratory tract infections like this - influenza, measles - you can’t get rid of them without a vaccine.

“If a good vaccine comes along, then I’m wrong - but if not, everyone will get it in the end”.

"I don’t think that the serial lock-up is a very good solution.

"You’re destroying the fabric of your society and your economy - and you [are] pushing the serious cases into the future."

He added that while he agrees on flattening the curve through a lockdown, “they will not prevent people from coming infected in the future”.



I don’t understand this argument - I would have assumed that the only answer to “Would you like to die now or next winter?” Would be- “Next winter, thanks.”

Let alone the chance however slim that therapies and or vaccines might come along.

And there seems to be a high correlation between pro life (at the start of life) and let’s get out there and get all this dying over with as fast as possible, sure it’s only old people. Which seems counter-intuitive to me.


I don’t agree

  • I am convinced by Anders Tegnell’s argument that without lockdowns the people gain herd immunity so that there is not a second peak, plus curtail the economic damage, poverty, debt, depression etc. which all correlate with life expectancy.


Anecdotal - speaking to a doctor and nurse recently who tested positive in March. Both have blood clotting going on now.


Spain is showing 5-10% of the population with antibodies after a very rough couple of months. That seems to be a long way off herd immunity numbers. And what if immunity isn’t long lasting, then you have emptied your old folks homes for very little benefit. I mean it’s all very well saying it only hits the vulnerable, but I would hope to be in the vulnerable group in 30 years time and wouldn’t mind a bit of social solidarity.

My anecdote is the wife of a work colleague, mid 40’s, no pre-existing conditions afaik, ended up with lesions on the brain and is now in rehab learning to speak again.


from reading on this its yet another not very “accurate” antibody test.


Does accuracy matter when you are looking at the overall results? You can factor it in. It certainly matters when you are testing individuals and they are going to be altering their behaviour based on the result.

From the above we can be pretty sure that less than say 20% of people have antibodies and I’m sure someone with a grasp of statistics can give a much more accurate number with a confidence interval.


“We’ve unfortunately had six pure, solely coronavirus deaths — six out of 3.3 million people,” County Supervisor Jim Desmond said on the radio show Armstrong & Getty Extra Large Interviews ., The San Diego Union-Tribune reported. San Diego County had reported roughly 190 deaths at the time — the current number is 200.

Desmond went on to criticize California’s lockdown. “I mean, what number are we trying to get to with those odds. I mean, it’s incredible. We want to be safe, and we can do it, but unfortunately, it’s more about control than getting the economy going again and keeping people safe,” he said…

Indeed, the disease has proven most deadly for people with underlying health conditions, so it stands to reason that “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” would be the minority — perhaps even just 3.2 percent of the total recorded deaths, as Desmond suggested.

As of Friday afternoon, there have been 87,218 deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the U.S. If Desmond’s claim is accurate and if that 3.2 percent rate holds across the country, and discounting the death certificate inflation, that would mean there are only 2,891 “pure, solely coronavirus deaths” in the U.S.

This is a rough estimate and it would be extremely difficult to confirm…

…James Agresti and Andrew Glen at Just Facts compared the maximum years of life the lockdowns could possibly save and compared it to the years of life lost from the anxiety surrounding the pandemic, including lockdown anxiety. “The anxiety from reactions to Covid-19—such as business shutdowns, stay-at-home orders, media exaggerations, and legitimate concerns about the virus—will extinguish at least seven times more years of life than can possibly be saved by the lockdowns,” they concluded.

Since COVID-19 robs an average of 12 years of life from its victims, the lockdowns could save no more than 7.4 million years of life. Meanwhile, the anxiety and stress of the pandemic will cost 42.9 million Americans an average of 1.3 years of life, thus destroying 55.7 million years of life.

The coronavirus anxiety and stress cost at least 7.5 times more in terms of years of life than the lockdowns could possibly save, according to Just Facts.


Clearly manyy people have found the ‘new normal’ preferable to the old.

There are certainly attractions to not being forced to commute long distances into cities when working from home. And maybe some city dwellers are preferring the lower footfall as in the article above.

But in the case of Dublin city centre however, is it really that liveable when compared to other cities in Europe? Its always seemed like the development of the past 20 years has been modelled on the premise that the city centre is mainly a commerical area for use by three categories of people,

1 day time commuters/shoppers
2 night time drinkers/partiers
3 tourists

Beyond some of the older working class communities left in places like Summerhill or the Liberties, the vast majority of people who appear to live in the city centre are transient, such as young foreigners/students etc.

With a potential move to working from home removing large sections of category 1 above, social distancing impacting on category 2 and tourism absented for the forseeable, the city centre could conceivably become a bit of a dead zone in many respects.



Of course, the fact that much of the science has simply been wrong, may go some way toward explaining the threat to the status of scientists and science generally emanating from the current set of events around Covid 19



Could be a positive for many many people…


He’s taking a narcissistic view on it here. All the stuff related to lock-downs etc is about protecting other people. The question to ask is how many other people he’s prepared to have die so that he doesn’t need to wear a mask (or whatever).
In that way, to abandon attempts to control a pandemic is to remain in Omelas

The second set of points around excessive power and influence for companies like Facebook and Google are fine, but it’s really just an incomplete critique of the excessive (and increasing) power of capital and the subjugation of labour. Yet he seems to reject organising or collective action, and so delivers the power straight into the hands of those he hates.