UK Government rank as the worst at dealing with Coronavirus

Trump has had pressure on the US dealing with Coronavirus, however, the reality is that the UK is the worst country in handling the Coronavirus. A case study of what not to do. 

Like the UK, Trump was slow to act, however, the US has since moved much faster to tackle the problem. 

Now that numbers from Carehomes are being included in the stats, the UK has moved ahead of Italy as the worst European country, with only the US having more deaths globally. However, the US has a population size of around 700% larger than the UK, so per capita, the UK death rate is much worse. 

Germanies government is so much better than the UK. GDP per capita is much higher. They also have a far more effective public service. 

If Germany had the same population size as the USA, their GDP's would be around the same. Germany has something like 4 hospital beds to 1 of the UK per capita.  However, if the UK was the same size as the US, the GDP per capita is somewhat lower than the United States. 

As time goes on, more and more government negligence and corruption are being found out. Recently a UK company had to sell its manufactured PPE to EU countries as the UK government refused to respond to them. This is while NHS staff have no PPE and the death rate of medical staff is apparently very high - people of all ages. The UK has certainly had deaths due to no ventilators or proper care. 

This does raise questions about if the UK should instead remain in the EU. 

1. Germany is capitalist with a mix of socialism. They have a strong government and public service. 
2. The UK is capitalist with a mix of feudalism. (Landlords- people born with land). Old school birthright, not moving forward. The public service is so underfunded, and the Coronavirus has exposed this. 

The government recently announced a gov backed business loan scheme for the Coronavirus. It was from the banks but 80% backed by the government. It turned out less than 2% of businesses that applied for this were eligible. (Had banks lent to 100% of companies, and 20% went bust the banks would have probably gone bust themselves). So either the government knew this from the outset, or were just too incompetent to realize it. 

So companies have been collapsing because of cash flow because the government bailout plan is useless. The biggest companies have been taken care of, whilst the SMB gets no support. (Despite having to pay a higher % ratio of corporate tax vs earnings )

The government grant scheme also seems to be a scam, with so many ways that make sure many companies not eligible. 

SB

Maybe you are right about the British system - it is very class based and  you obviously falls a bit in the middle of nothing.  

I am not sure about the German Government.  The Public Service is normally good when the Government is poor and directionless.  The Federal Government is very weak and made up  of three parties with the -

   *   strongest being the CDU with about 20%  support

   *    the Bavarian Conservatives with about 10% support

   *    the Socialists down to  12% support and 

   *    the greens with 12%  support.  

The Government  cannot take ay action on anything but perhaps the virus issue because of a united political support from all parties,                                                                                               

SB

You probably missed what I tried to convey.   When the Government is weak - like the case was in France before  De Gaulle became President -  the country was run by the Public Service,   It had to be very efficient to run the country -  when the Government became stronger the Public Service became weaker, and less efficient.

I doubt not that h same applies to the German Government at present - the support of the national Government is poor,  The coalition has been driven together by opposition by the strong showing of the AfD - the party called radical right by the media - but as per normal not true.   Within the Government the parties is divided and cannot take any decisions other than by concession which means tat diverse groups like the Bavarians and the Greens can and do hold the government at ransom. 

The fact is that in the case of the coronavirus issue it was a national threat and the Germans did not treat it as a political issue.   When it comes to political issues Germany is in paralysis.

In essence in the UK there is a total misconception by you of the political set-up.  The House of Lords is just a historical issue without any real power from a legislative perspective.  Most of the old noble families used to serve in the House of Lords - but not anymore.  Nopwadasys it is more a House where  legislation van be debated, but not rejected. 

The problem in the UK is that  like in the USA the media is owned by a very small number of people and  Companies.   It creates politically usage to influence outcomes in whatever the owners design to happen.    The aristocracy and the nobility has zero influence in politics anymore and never express anything like a political opinion.

So look for the scoundrels running the count elsewhere.   In the USA the situation is the same.  In the UK to governments - both under Labour and Conservatives have shown a disregard for the working class people and when they got the chance - like in the EU referendum - they sock the political elite in the face and voted to leave the EU,   In the last UK election they did the same.    The elite vote went to the Lib-Dems - the working class was split down the middle and a large proportion voted Conservative,

In the USA the same  type of situation developed.   A political  class developed with no real difference between  the  Republicans and the Democrats politically.   However, the Political elite got shafted in 2016 when the people rejected the system that caused them to become poorer and poorer.  They rejected the political elite of both parties and the elite and media could not take it. The media and the elite lost control of the system - but is using all kinds of means  and often enough illegal lies and distortions to get back the control they lost.   That is why the situation in the USA is  the mess it is at present and the UK was in the same mess  until the December election.

What I am driving at is that the majority working class in society is fighting back against a system where the ultra-rich and the political elite decide in issues and  do not care a hell about what happened to ordinary people at all.  

As to the NHS the problems  relating to bureaucratic inefficiency is even a greater problem  than funding.   There is not a hospital system in the world that is run by Government which is not less efficient than hospitals run by private companies and costing more per bed to operate.              

SB

I did not turn the discussion into the House of Lords issue - you did - also the land issue. 

As to the land holdings you are not up the date either,    The Royal Family owns massive farms, but they and the nobility owns a small percentage of the land holdings in the UK. Even in the c ase of the landholdings, the farmworkers often gets paid not only their salaries, but they get reasonable areas where they farm for heir own benefit, 

Most farmland in the UK belongs to ordinary farmers  not the people you designate as the only type of landowners.  What you seem to forget is  that the ultra wealthy in England that really play a role in politics are not farmers at all.  

You do not say how the land ownership need to change,   Wanting to do it Communist Style???          

@CleverWanker, why do you never provide sources? 

If you make a claim ""Most farmland in the UK belongs to ordinary farmers, not the people you designate as the only type of landowners."" - you need to back it up, using a logical argument, proof, and sources 

When you worked for the NP and ANC maybe you got away with this, but in real life providing evidence and sources is a professional and ethical practice. 

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/17/who-owns-england-thousand-secret-landowners-author

https://www.newstatesman.com/life-and-society/2011/03/million-acres-land-ownership

https://www.countryfile.com/news/who-owns-england-history-of-englands-landownership-and-how-much-is-privately-owned-today/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/england-land-ownership-royals-middle-ages-a8878931.html

----------                 ----------                 ----------                 ----------                 ----------                 

However that aside, the key theme of this post is about the performance of the UK government dealing with Coronavirus which has been utterly pathetic. I expect a response on this, not more drivel that you have not bothered to research. 

In general, if you respond to one of my blog posts I expect you to provide sources to substantiate your argument. Just pulling BS from your arse will no longer be tolerated. 

My threads are no longer a place for you to take a dump. I expect responses that have a hypothesis and then are well are researched, contain a logical argument and finally includes sources. Thanks in advance...

The fact is that you write so much garbage and your main sources are normally socialist fake news agencies.  In this case it is no better,    The fact is what is "gentry" - are all farmowners classed as gentry?   My father was a farm-owner?  -  So he was part of the gentry in SA and I am as well. 

Who did that study and seems half-baked to me,  The 17% unregistered land is normally state-owned conservation areas and natural forest and reserve areas belonging to Government - it is the same everywhere in the world,

Aside from anything else, a scientific study would start off with a real analysis what the total land area of England is.  From there it would break down the area covered and used for urban purposes (cities, towns and even hamlets)  and how much is rural,  From there a separate study is given.  In the article I read there is four instance the land ownership in London by four aristocratic families of 400 hectares,   Where does the income from those families go?  The Queen gets no income from her properties in London - it goes straight to the Government who pays her the royal stipend at about 8% of the money paid to the Government,   

I am just trying to point out it is dangerous and stupid to quote newspapers as sources for studies like that,   An article starting off with right of way over farmland is BS anyway,   The fact is that nobody can walk into private home gardens and start picking flowers,   It would be trespassing - why should it be allowed on privately owned farm-land.

If you want to believe garbage and quote it on site - you are welcome to do so, but don't expect from others to swallow news-media stories as gospel and not querying it.  Stuff from the Guardian and New Statesman is as totally biased as your beloved CNN is,  It is the same as the story about landownership in SA is.   The fact is that 85% of the land owned by whites s total BS - but is used by the EFF and elements in the ANC to get their hands on commercial farms that produce 85% of all agricultural food production in SA,   What you produce is nothing more than propaganda stories in the media.

The fact is further that you start off with feudal stories and state that the UK is still  feudal country.   That is about as Communist as anybody ever come up with,   You then claimed that you have travelled widely and how come I query you on situations in England.  I indicated I really travelled more widely than you ever did,  The rest is tripe as well.  Modern developments impact on all countries and if you want to know what affects your daily life you must not confine yourself  to what happens in your country of residence only.   

Just for once stay away from topics you know zero about and stay away from classifying religion determining whether religious people are rightwing and thinking people are all leftwing  and therefore acceptable.   That shows total ignorance of the political situation world wide.  The Chinese Communists are leftwing - yet you apparently  classify them as rightwing because they are a dictatorship.   I do not want to repeat the rest of your mangled mind stories here,   

Keep to  facts please and my advice is forget about newspaper propaganda stories as reliable.        

I did not ignore the item under discussion - I clearly refer to the NHS as an example.  I stated that the problem with the NHS is that it is not only under-funding that leads to NHS problems  it is also bureaucratic incompetence that leads to problems.   There has been I believe many investigations of the NHS administration as to incompetence and never a solution found - that from what I read in the media over many years.   Government service is never efficient and that is a product of trying to ruin a country by public servants,    I was one and I know how they operate. 

I think most of the countries in Western Europe and North America failed in dealing with the virus and he best performers were in fact Germany and Sweden,   The fact is that disinformation coming out of China and the WHO until the end of January could have something to do with it, while internal politics in for instance the USA could have much to do with it,  When the problem in the USA really surfaced it as very late to start actions.

In a way there were problems in all countries dealing with the problem and to single out the UK and the USA as the main failure is ingenious - but not really factual.          .  

That article about landownership in the UK is interesting,   On the list of 50 eleven are royal or noble owners,    I did add up the figures and of the 6 729 093 acres covered in the survey I find that the Royal and nobility portion amounts to 837 902 acres.    The rest is either Government of privately owned land by companies and individuals with no connection to the British Royal family or nobility.  So lets break it down  a bit:

Total area                 =     600 000 000 000 acres   #

Top 50 landowners   =               6 729 093 acres

Royal and noble        =                  837 902 acres

#   I take this figure provided by you as correct.

The nobility makes up 12,45% of the land holdings of the 50 top landowners in the UK  When it comes to total land holdings comparative to ownership by the nobility it is totally insignificant.