172driver wrote:
Of course the above figures bring us back to the discussion about metrics.
This is exactly the point – I typically use ICU cases or deaths instead of positive test results because the latter one is (unfortunately) much more related to testing than to actual disease. I think I have written it here before: When we started (voluntary) testing at office locations in the first week we had 7 positive initial tests and 5 of them confirmed by PCR amongst the first 1.000 tests. that is 500 per 100.000 – much more than the official numbers have ever been. And that is in a company which is still 95% home office and only people visiting the office which feel 100% fit.
With ICU cases and deaths there are some grey areas as well (e.g. if a specific death is due to or with Covid) but they are much smaller than with tests.
dublinpilot wrote:
wonder how much ill will this pandemic has created between various citizens within states and between states and will that ill will persist after the pandemic is over, or will it quickly be forgotten.
in my perception it has for sure been a tremendous accelerator for the actual “mental” implementation of Brexit. While at least on this side of the Channel before the Pandemic still the general impression was more like “yes, it’s formally a Brexit but let’s see if really something changes”, people on both have now understood, that the other side is a fierce competitor and there is no such thing as cooperation.
there is no such thing as cooperation
True for all of Europe, and indeed the world 
Countries have no friends, only an occassional alignment in interests. von Bismarck?
The EU has only just hung together in all this. The weak members (the majority of member countries, most of which originally joined up only for specific advantages) had no options left but to wait for whatever vaccine gets allocated to them. And if they tried to go their own way they would be bullied to get back in line, “or else”.
wonder how much ill will this pandemic has created between various citizens within states and between states and will that ill will persist after the pandemic is over, or will it quickly be forgotten.
A lot of ill will for sure. To me, it has demonstrated just how opportunistic and cynical the regional politicians are, in destroying many measures intended to constrain the virus without excessively destroying the economy. I found this the most frustrating aspect. I am sure it wasn’t happening in WW2 – or perhaps it was but the then media censorship suppressed it. This is a problem in every country; the materials for political platform building are well known
The rest of human nature is as it always was At the individual human level it will be forgotten in the long run…
What won’t be forgotten, I HOPE, is the absolutely massive international relations lesson. Every country, EU or not, needs a vertically integrated PPE and vaccine production facility – or have a really good alliance with somebody who has, and it can’t be China; they can’t be trusted as far as you can throw them, but actually that is true for most countries; see my comment above about alignment of interests
Which EU countries do you think have been bullied into line or else?
It wasn’t France
Malibuflyer wrote:
because the latter one is (unfortunately) much more related to testing than to actual disease
I read recently in the UK only 1 in 5 go to get tested if they suspect they have symptoms, which means the actual numbers are very significantly higher than is reported (there are significant disincentives to being tested – if you test positive you are “sentenced” to a period of self-isolation, so people are more likely to just blow it off and avoid the “punishment”). There is some random testing carried out by the ONS which gets a better picture of actual infection rates.
This under-estimation is why the Zoe scheme is well regarded as reasonably accurate. You report symptoms without getting caught
Peter wrote:
and it can’t be China; they can’t be trusted as far as you can throw them, but actually that is true for most countries;
That is an interesting opinion: Is there any example in the pandemic of China or a major Chinese company actually breaking an arrangement?
I fully support your poiunt that there is no such thing as “friends” or even “trust” between countries which are n to welded together by higher interests. But as far as my experience goes, China has been one of the most reliable and predictable partners in international trade (and in general international relationships) over the last decades. We might not like what they do, but they do what they say and if they have made a commitment, they stick to it.
In contrast to many other countries their behavior has not changed like a flag in the wind due to political partisanships of parties that happen to be at the power for some time – one of the upsides of the Chinese political systems (amongst many downsides) is stability.
So in summary I’d come to quite the opposite conclusion to you: In a world where trust or friendship between countries is a very shaky concept, China is one of the more trustworthy partners: You might not like what they are doing, but they do it in the utmost reliable way!
I’ve been dealing with China for 20+ years and it is a challenge at multiple levels. I have written about it before, from the perspective of a small manufacturing company buying stuff from there. And the challenges are changing over time, and nowadays most firms there are interested in making a “fast buck” first and foremost. This has created a difficult trading environment out there because key staff keep moving on, and creates difficult QA issues back here because you can so easily get junk delivered – as Europe found out with PPE which nearly all came from China – and checking out whether the company is a bunch of cowboys (“vendor / supply chain auditing” in modern corporate-speak) is both hard (due to having to travel there; a huge waste of time and logistics) and temporary (if you buy say once every 2 years, the company is likely to have disappeared since the last time you had the goods, and the only solution is to buy in bulk and infrequently, which is fine with non perishable goods, and if you have continuous deliveries then you will get periodically burnt especially if you operate “JIT” like all modern companies do). Comms is hard since most firms have only 1 or 2 English speaking (usually only barely so) staff; I am currently engaged in a frustrating exchange with several transformer manufacturers, with a 100% loss of airmail packages to China (prob. theft disguised as CV19 measures) and then more funny business once they get the stuff via DHL. 1 email exchange per 24hrs is all one can get.
So yes you can regard Chinese companies as very consistent – in these aspects That is why all the big Western manufacturers keep permanent staff out there; I am sure Apple has no less than 3 figures hanging around Foxconn.
One might ask: why buy from China, given all this? Because it is cheap! Practically nobody in the West will lift a finger for the labour rates they pay in their sweat shops. The ethics is something else 
The ethics is dealt with at European govt PPE-procurement level by buying it via a middleman, which occassionally is a good mate of a govt minister. Every European country has had these issues but most don’t go public with them because slagging off your suppliers is not helpful, with a hard to get product.
And within a given large batch they tend to be very consistent, whereas in the West employees doing boring jobs tend to be thinking about going clubbing…
Malibuflyer wrote:
So in summary I’d come to quite the opposite conclusion to you: In a world where trust or friendship between countries is a very shaky concept, China is one of the more trustworthy partners: You might not like what they are doing, but they do it in the utmost reliable way!
Last Edited by Malibuflyer at 07 Apr 09:02
We may have to very strongly disagree on this one.
Nothing is more contrary to my experience, and that is of quite a number of companies I deal with and / or are associated with.
A family member is involved in shipping with a major international company. If they could, they would have absolutely nothing to do with China.
I recall the Chinese Ambassador on TV in the UK (I think the BBC) talking about the plight of the Uighurs and I have never heard so many disingenious words spout forth from the mouth of a high ranking official, and I dont say that from the perspective of taking sides. What does it matter. If this is the stadard China would have a high ranking official set, then unfortuantely it has much to say about their general business integrity.
I do not reflect on the Chinese people in general and have found the relatively few of which I can speak lovely people, but in terms of business I would start from not trusting any business deal with the Chinese under any circumstances – a much safer position from which to start.
I am afraid this is my experience. I am sure yours is different, but I hope you can understand this is one on which we will have to disagree, because you cant change my experience and almost with exception the experiences of others that have been directly related to me.
