How much will this cost me

[Chris152]

However the current crisis has the potential to radically change the future in the way that 2008-10 did not:
- work from home, reduced office space, flexible working
- online shopping - ten years progress in 10 weeks
- increased use of face-time, reduced travel
- revised supply chains to reduce future vulnerability, UK manufacturing boost
- possibly reduced tourism - both UK and overseas
- part home based education

I keep coming back to this.
Little doubt online shopping's increased significantly (in my experience), and becoming really efficient in the case of larger stores. Less so in the case of stuff I recently ordered from smaller, local shops who don't seem to have efficient delivery info or deadlines (I'm still waiting for orders put in last week). You have to wonder if this crisis isn't the final call for small shops on the high streets, both in terms of how they keep going through lockdown but also how they cope with shifts in shopping trends further in the direction of delivery from large stores/ warehouses.
As for working from home/ part home-based education, these can work together as more parents don't need to go away so often, relieving schools of their child-minding function. I think there's already a whole generation of kids who turn to the net if they want to know something, and the idea of well-crafted teaching sessions and discussions online would probably come pretty naturally to them. Obviously that needs to be combined with hands-on time and social and behavioural learning so physical presence would still be needed at least part of the time, but however you look at it the crisis must have pushed technology-based learning along a fair way.
And less travel - at least til we have less-polluting technologies - is a good thing in many ways.

Terrible times, but maybe productive ones in some ways.

 

[Rorschach]

- work from home, reduced office space, flexible working
- online shopping - ten years progress in 10 weeks
- increased use of face-time, reduced travel
- revised supply chains to reduce future vulnerability, UK manufacturing boost
- possibly reduced tourism - both UK and overseas
- part home based education

I think you are right, a lot of this will come to pass in a very short period of time. Some of those things I think are probably a very good thing what worries me though is the speed of change which I think will have terrible consequences.

I am not a luddite, I embrace change but I recognise there are some changes which can happen very quickly and are a good thing, and other changes which need to happen much more slowly in order for people to adapt.

Lets take changing attitudes to public transport. I personally would love to see most public transport (outside of major cities like London) disappear. I think it is very wasteful, polluting, expensive and impractical. I would like to see it replaced by a network of self driving electric cars that you hire as needed. However, this change takes time, if we introduced that network right away, the roads wouldn't have the capacity in some places, we would have hundreds of thousands of buses, trams, trains, taxis scrapped and their respective drivers out of work. The national grid couldn't cope with the electricity demand and the country would grind to a halt. A major change like that needs time for people to adapt.

These same sentiments I think can be applied to a lot of things that care changing so quickly now, online shopping increasing too fast, home schooling, working from home, collapse in tourism. There are benefits to all these changes, but not when they are enacted in a matter of weeks rather than years or decades.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

... The national grid couldn't cope with the electricity demand and the country would grind to a halt ...

What?? You mean there won't be enough windmills? :shock:

By the bye. Many working practices will change permanently. My wife works for a bank, and she says they've now been forced to make changes that have been talked about for years. They work perfectly well, and will not be reversed. She has never cleared so much work in such a short time since her two immediate bosses are both working from home.

 

[Rorschach]

What?? You mean there won't be enough windmills? :shock:

:lol: :lol: :lol:

By the bye. Many working practices will change permanently. My wife works for a bank, and she says they've now been forced to make changes that have been talked about for years. They work perfectly well, and will not be reversed. She has never cleared so much work in such a short time since her two immediate bosses are both working from home.

My partner wanted to do some work from home before all of this, certain parts of her job are better in the office with easy access to colleagues but other parts are best done with no disturbances. They told her it wasn't possible to work from home, how quickly that changed.
That being said, she can't wait to get back to the office, at least for a few days a week, her home office setup is far from ideal and when things get back to a bit more normality we are going to need to re-think the furniture a bit.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Swmbo can do a certain amount of work from home, but as her work is clerical she needs to be be in the office most of the time. Working from home isn't always very practical - last night the broadband speed was 0.3mbps. Even at 3.00am it was only 7mbps.

 

[Chris152]

Presumably things will have to change even more rapidly if we can't develop a vaccine and can't develop immunity that lasts a significant length of time?

 

[Rorschach]

Presumably things will have to change even more rapidly if we can't develop a vaccine and can't develop immunity that lasts a significant length of time?

If that happens we are pretty stuffed. The only option will be open C19 hospitals a bit like the old TB hospitals and just accept that lots of people will die every year from it.

 

[rafezetter]

......but it is clear the lockdown was too severe and too soon. ........

Except there are plenty of people arguing the precise opposite. Chris 152, for instance, has long argued that it was too late and too lax and that's why so many people have died.

There are too many people talking in black and white, and not noticing that the world is shaded in grey.

Take a look at Sweden, minimal lockdown but with sensible social distancing, deaths and infection curve very similar to our own.
There are plenty of people arguing on both sides, I obviously fall onto one side, others fall onto another. The problem is this was framed as a lives vs economy, but the economy is lives as well, so it's lives vs lives and that's a damn tricky argument to make. All we can hope is that in seeing the folly for what it is, we can get back to a normality that revives the economy instead of living in fear for evermore.

I don't see it that way - and no I'm not in a position like Dr Bob possibly on the brink of losing 30 years worth of hard work and everything attached to it, but you can be broke and alive - if you are alive you have a chance - those people that have died from the virus caught from some public place like a shop / pub / venue etc etc ... not so much.

So it's not quite such a "lives vs lives" equation as you make out Rorshach.

 

[Rorschach]

I don't see it that way - and no I'm not in a position like Dr Bob possibly on the brink of losing 30 years worth of hard work and everything attached to it, but you can be broke and alive - if you are alive you have a chance - those people that have died from the virus caught from some public place like a shop / pub / venue etc etc ... not so much.

So it's not quite such a "lives vs lives" equation as you make out Rorshach.

It's not as simple as just losing your job or losing some money. Economies are lives in many ways both obvious and not so obvious. A depressed economy will cost use many more lives, young and old, in the long term than we lose from C19.

 

[rafezetter]

I think you are right, a lot of this will come to pass in a very short period of time. Some of those things I think are probably a very good thing what worries me though is the speed of change which I think will have terrible consequences.

I am not a luddite, I embrace change but I recognise there are some changes which can happen very quickly and are a good thing, and other changes which need to happen much more slowly in order for people to adapt.

Lets take changing attitudes to public transport. I personally would love to see most public transport (outside of major cities like London) disappear. I think it is very wasteful, polluting, expensive and impractical. I would like to see it replaced by a network of self driving electric cars that you hire as needed. However, this change takes time, if we introduced that network right away, the roads wouldn't have the capacity in some places, we would have hundreds of thousands of buses, trams, trains, taxis scrapped and their respective drivers out of work. The national grid couldn't cope with the electricity demand and the country would grind to a halt. A major change like that needs time for people to adapt.

Quite apart from the maintenance and costs issue - they would be so expensive in the first 10 years or so while companies claw back the initial investment - plus a good few years for profits (ecause it WILL be the major companies like Honda / google / FB etc not govts with the money to do this) so your average old granny who needs to go shopping won;t be able to afford it - unless they put on some sort of "OAP discount" - driving the prices up for everyone else.

I'm guessing you've not used overland public transport that much eh? You can't have with that idea.

The infrastructure required to allow the potential 60 odd people (iirc) on a SINGLE bus to have a small electric car EACH is mindblowing - entire towns would have to be revised -

Smart cars are 2.6 mtres long and most would agree are the shortest car in existence today - x 54 = 140.4 metres - BUMPER TO BUMPER add spacing = 200 metres give or take - a double decker bus = 4.4 metres.

You've not really thought this through at all have you?

alternative idea - electric buses / trams.... how novel.

Edit: some DD buses carry 87 people or 226.2 meteres wroth of cars (BUMPER TO BUMPER) with spacing for the 87 cars - 300 meteres plus - thats 3 football pitches instead of the 4.4m for a bus :roll: .

There's so many things wrong with that idea I'm not even going to start because it'll take me hours to list them all.

 

[Rorschach]

Of course, how silly of me, no I haven't given a single moments thought to how it would all work, in fact I have never used a tube, a bus or a train in my life. You were right all along, we should continue as we are, in fact, lets bring back horses and carts :roll:

 

[rafezetter]

I don't see it that way - and no I'm not in a position like Dr Bob possibly on the brink of losing 30 years worth of hard work and everything attached to it, but you can be broke and alive - if you are alive you have a chance - those people that have died from the virus caught from some public place like a shop / pub / venue etc etc ... not so much.

So it's not quite such a "lives vs lives" equation as you make out Rorshach.

It's not as simple as just losing your job or losing some money. Economies are lives in many ways both obvious and not so obvious. A depressed economy will cost use many more lives, young and old, in the long term than we lose from C19.

Sorry wrong again.

A depressed economy can be combated - the effects reduced, a reduced standard of life is STILL LIFE - death from a pandemic is death. The 2008 crash didn't see a massive surge of deaths - yes there were deaths, people who were graded as "fit to work" when they were clearly not and lost benefits, some ultimately taking thier own lives, and there were obviously other cases but that was not "hundreds PER DAY" or it would be all over the world news as "poor people dying in droves as depression hits". Didn't happen that way did it? Sensationalist much?

Reopening the parts of the economy that rely on person to person human interaction when there is still a risk of a second wave is utter lunacy - I know it's hard and I cannot imagine Dr Bob's situation and others in a similar position, but ask him if he would trade a single persons life to keep his business. I don't know him and never met him to my knowledge, but my gut says he and many others in his position would say "no"; a Flat NO, not even an "umm maybe".

Like the backlash against wetherspoons today - if you open up a public confined space PEOPLE CANNOT BE TRUSTED NOT TO TAKE THE P*SS. Did you learn NOTHING from all the reports of the daytrippers to Mt Snowdon and other beauty spots and parks?

Give the people even HALF a reason and they will go "all in" - and screw everyone else.

Full disclosure Rorschach - do you have some skin in this game? What's your business and mode of income?

Me - I've got no work - I'm a handyman and my 2 main clients have told me to stay away - I'm out of work for 4 months at least give or take.

 

[Rorschach]

Time to use the ignore feature myself :lol:

 

[doctor Bob]

I know it's hard and I cannot imagine Dr Bob's situation and others in a similar position, but ask him if he would trade a single persons life to keep his business. I don't know him and never met him to my knowledge, but my gut says he and many others in his position would say "no"; a Flat NO, not even an "umm maybe".

It depends on whose life we are talking about ...... the **** and the 2 arseholes who did my extension in our old house, easy decision. The person who reversed into my car on xmas eve doing £8k of damage and drove off .......... I have quite a list.

Actually I'm feeling much more bouyant, I think we will be OK. When the dung hits the fan you look at the worst senario, as time passes you start to truely look at the situation. I have enough reserve to last for 6 months with zero work, with the current booked in work approx 4 months and good quotes out there I think we will be fine. I could have done with more help, no hand outs for me, but we will be fine and treat it as a challenge.

And I can get away with a peaky blinders haircut....

 

[rafezetter]

Of course, how silly of me, no I haven't given a single moments thought to how it would all work, in fact I have never used a tube, a bus or a train in my life. You were right all along, we should continue as we are, in fact, lets bring back horses and carts :roll:

Being flippant shows you've got no real argument - if you've got proper solutions, then let's hear them - otherwise it's just yet another half baked "this would be nice" idea from someone who doesn't really understand the ramifications. Using a bus now and again isn't the same as being a regular public transport commuter - and Horse and carts would be worse for different reasons. What you propose is to scrap the current system in favor of a system that would add 79 more vehicles on the road, make each journey more expensive because "1 person 1 vehicle" in the majority of cases. - you want to add MORE vehicles to an already overburdened system. 80 vehicles (per bus) = an army of mechanics to maintain them, great for those mechanically minded I guess.

These companies that had these systems over an entire country wouldn't dream of using your average independant garage mechanic so you'd have to have airfield hanger sized storage facilities dotted all over the place to house all the damaged / broken ones that need repairs.

I'm guessing you'd need to have 10 MILLION or more of these vehicles around at any one time. TEN MILLION. possibly more as some people decide it's easier for them to use that than have thier own car.

I'm guessing you've never seem the mountains of "free bicycles" that are damaged beyond repair - because people are people - and the army of bike mechanics trying to keep up with repairs - and that's just a simple mechanical device.

It would take many many many years before the country (and world) as a whole embraced the new situation - but even when they did, it still doesn't change the fact that you'e got 80 vehicles on the road when there used to just JUST ONE.

Here's the bottom line Rorschach - TRADING ONE VEHICLE FOR 80 IS A REALLY REALLY REALLY DUMB IDEA. I don't care how "clean" it is.

and yeah - ELECTRIC buses / trams.

So you are either a fool or trolling, because if large capacity transport wasn't cost (and environementally) efficient - it wouldn't exist at all.

Should we all get rowing boats to go to the continent as well?

Oh yeah and it would give these companies a chokehold on the public - you know the cost of a BUS ride in Bristol? £4. £4 anywhere. They scrapped the "return fare" years ago in favor of "two singles" (more money) then they scrapped that in favor of a flat fee - £4 and you can go one stop or 50 - all day. Great for some, most others, not so much.

And that's a BUS company that can seat 60/80 people on ONE BUS. Now imagine you got all the overheads I've just descibed above, and more probably and consider how much a short trip to the shops would cost an OAP who has no other means of transport.

Christ it's £12 in a taxi from the station to my house and that's TWO MILES. - from the centre of Bristol to my home FOUR miles away is almost £30 - I'm truly not kidding.

You obviously live in some nice super cheap utopia, but here in the real world - removing buses where the cost of running that bus is shared over all the people using it that day - would be a catastrophe.

Think about it - IF EVERYONE COULD AFFORD UBER (TAXI) PRICES EVERYONE WOULD ALREADY BE USING AN UBER!!!!!!

un-beleiveable.

 

[rafezetter]

I know it's hard and I cannot imagine Dr Bob's situation and others in a similar position, but ask him if he would trade a single persons life to keep his business. I don't know him and never met him to my knowledge, but my gut says he and many others in his position would say "no"; a Flat NO, not even an "umm maybe".

It depends on whose life we are talking about ...... the pineapple and the 2 pineapples who did my extension in our old house, easy decision. The person who reversed into my car on xmas eve doing £8k of damage and drove off .......... I have quite a list.

Actually I'm feeling much more bouyant, I think we will be OK. When the dung hits the fan you look at the worst senario, as time passes you start to truely look at the situation. I have enough reserve to last for 6 months with zero work, with the current booked in work approx 4 months and good quotes out there I think we will be fine. I could have done with more help, no hand outs for me, but we will be fine and treat it as a challenge.

And I can get away with a peaky blinders haircut....

Thats great to hear that you think you'll be OK and yeah lol I know what you mean.

Rorshach - still no info on what your business is yet - is it a secret or do you indeed have some skin in this game?

 

[RogerS]

Of course, how silly of me, no I haven't given a single moments thought to how it would all work, in fact I have never used a tube, a bus or a train in my life. You were right all along, we should continue as we are, in fact, lets bring back horses and carts :roll:

Being flippant shows you've got no real argument - if you've got proper solutions, then let's hear them - otherwise it's just yet another half baked "this would be nice" idea from someone who doesn't really understand the ramifications. ......

Spot on...spot on.

So you are either a fool or trolling,....

Perhaps both ?

 

[Terry - Somerset]

I suspect the answer to the transport dilemma is not the replacement of a single bus by 80 driverless vehicles.

Firstly, few busses outside of peak periods actually have ~60 passengers on board. Often you have a ~60 seater diesel bus with less than 10 passengers. Very inefficient!

Secondly the current crisis is likely to promote material changes in behaviours - work from home for several days a week, schooling may be increasingly online, grocery shopping will undergo 10 years transition to home delivery in 10 weeks. This will reduce peak loads and total travel.

Thirdly I would not expect 100% personal ownership of driverless vehicles - they are more likely to be an app based charge per mile, or minute, or time of day, or combination of all three. Fitted with cameras, software, credit card data etc any damage could be recorded and charged for.

And finally a driverless bus, even with partial occupancy is likely to be cheaper per person than a single user vehicle. It may be possible to flex the size of vehicle 12/25//40/60 seater depending on demand. So public transport is likely to continue.

As for R, I think he is being deliberately provocative. Or closely descended from Marie Antoinette with the "let them eat cake" detachment from reality gene. If you don't like his remarks , ignore them. Responding = encouragement - as oxygen to a fire it fuels the flames.

 

[Rorschach]

I suspect the answer to the transport dilemma is not the replacement of a single bus by 80 driverless vehicles.

Firstly, few busses outside of peak periods actually have ~60 passengers on board. Often you have a ~60 seater diesel bus with less than 10 passengers. Very inefficient!

Secondly the current crisis is likely to promote material changes in behaviours - work from home for several days a week, schooling may be increasingly online, grocery shopping will undergo 10 years transition to home delivery in 10 weeks. This will reduce peak loads and total travel.

Thirdly I would not expect 100% personal ownership of driverless vehicles - they are more likely to be an app based charge per mile, or minute, or time of day, or combination of all three. Fitted with cameras, software, credit card data etc any damage could be recorded and charged for.

And finally a driverless bus, even with partial occupancy is likely to be cheaper per person than a single user vehicle. It may be possible to flex the size of vehicle 12/25//40/60 seater depending on demand. So public transport is likely to continue.

As for R, I think he is being deliberately provocative. Or closely descended from Marie Antoinette with the "let them eat cake" detachment from reality gene. If you don't like his remarks , ignore them. Responding = encouragement - as oxygen to a fire it fuels the flames.

Nice to see some thinking sensibly about this.

Yes I envision an app based system, charged based on journey distance but also time of day you want to make the journey and if you are willing share part/all of it with someone else. Price would be much cheaper than a taxi/Uber because there is no driver to pay and you can travel 24/7. For those journeys where time is not such a concern you could travel in the middle of the night at very cheap rates.
Advantages are unlimited locations available for door to door transport, unlike public transport, so perfect for elderly or those living in rural areas. Buses are trains are next to useless in these situations now. I know elderly people in the city who cannot walk to their nearest bus stop and I have relatives who live in the country and have a bus one day a week!
Disadvantages? Of course there are some, it does put more vehicles on the road but again as mentioned rural areas are very quiet anyway and of course the vehicles will be live-tracking other vehicles on the road so can plan routes to avoid congestion.

Of course you are not going to replace every seat on a bus with a car, that's madness, in very big cities like London you will likely still continue to have tube and buses, probably driverless eventually as is already starting in London. The system I propose is for the rest of the country and smaller cities where we have public transport but it is useless. I have a bus that runs past my house 4 times an hour, but it only goes to the city centre. I can't use it to travel to a supermarket or anything else, for that i need 2 buses at a cost of £5 for each return trip, per person. Taxis are cheaper than buses here if 2 people travel together.

 

[Blackswanwood]

Going back to the original question I am of the view that no one knows but whatever the cost, given we cannot change that C19 has happened, it will be much less than the cost of not having put measures in place.

I feel there is a prevalent tendency (possibly influenced by shock news making headlines) to think about the worst that could happen which then becomes an expectation. The human race is actually very resilient and generally finds opportunity out of adversity. Behaviours and expectations will be changed by the experience we are going through - hopefully some of the good with a bit more recognition of what's really important and general kindness prevailing will be part of that.