'Health is more important than Finance'

 

'Health is more important than Finance'

How far does that apply?

The UK, already suffering ‘lockdown by stealth’ after pronouncements by various media-appointed ‘experts’ on what is going to happen,  is now apparently on the verge of a ‘circuit breaker’ lockdown to ‘Save the NHS’.

What about saving the economy?

We are led to believe that everything must take second place to Public Health, no matter what the consequences - to the point where the government does not even undertake an impact assessment before bringing in a non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) recommended by a scientific advisor. But there are costs - we have seen them over the last couple of years; huge government borrowing (which we shall all be paying back over the next fifty years or so), a broken economy (inflation moving up - RPI now 7.1%, interest rates are going up too), society seems to be falling apart (for example - tragic deaths of children who missed the protection a normal education could provide, like Arthur Labinjo-Hughes; transport systems are broken due to significant staff shortages; schools being closed also due to staff shortages; the hospitality sector is throwing out perfectly good food because of bookings being cancelled, in turn because customers are scared of crowded places, and the establishments involved will quite probably struggle to survive into 2022, having lost much of their business in the most profitable weeks of the year). 

Is this sensible - where might it lead?

+ + +

I’m actually quite well placed to answer this question. In February 1990 I married a nurse; at the time it seemed like it might be the right thing for me. Even prior to marriage, she’d talked a few times about how it annoyed her that the news used to focus so much on the economy, and so much - including success - was measured in financial terms. 

‘Health is more important than money’, she would say. This was, apparently, a common belief amongst those who worked in the NHS.

That philosophy seemed sensible in 1990, but, over time, it had repercussions which destroyed our marriage and will continue to affect both of us for the rest of our lives. In our relationship I was the main earner, but I never earned a fortune; she worked part-time, mostly in care homes; her income was limited but needed. 

Unfortunately, over time the ‘health is more important than money’ idea evolved into a view on her part that good health required her to be happy, and to be happy required some expensive treats from time to time - hundred-pound hair-dos, trips to spas, shopping trips to buy new outfits every spring and autumn (‘I can’t possibly wear the same clothes as I did last year’, she would tell me). These became more than our finances could support; our savings dropped to none (‘health is more important than money’, she’d say when I said we needed a financial buffer). Later we moved to a big house where she was going to offer BnB; from the proceeds of the previous house sale  we had a five-figure savings pot to cover the costs of improvements to the property, and we had - I thought - agreed that we needed to manage our finances carefully. 

Unfortunately she wanted to open the business quickly, so she engaged builders and paid them whatever they asked to do the necessary work (‘I can’t challenge their costs, and I’m not going to get other people to quote’, she would say, ‘it would make me appear mean. Don’t be so precious about money’.) Our savings pot diminished once again. The BnB opened, and, to help out, a cleaner was engaged - at twenty pounds an hour. (This was almost twenty years ago; even now, Viv and I pay our cleaner £12 an hour.) ‘I’m sorry about the cost of the cleaner’, she told me, ‘but I don’t want to haggle over money.’ 

The BnB never made any money; every month we dipped into our savings to the tune of £1000. When our savings were exhausted we had to borrow - overdraft, loans, credit cards. Having had a mortgage of £100,000 in 2001, our debts ballooned to a quarter of a million by 2008, our combined annual income at the time maybe £50K. Any discussion of cutting or even monitoring expenditure was met with a refusal, and a clear statement that, if I really loved her, I would earn enough money so she could have what she wanted.

I left her in 2009, it was the only way to get my finances, and my life, under control. The madness had to end.

+ + +

Much of what I see among the scientific proponents of lockdowns and other measures - even vaccinations, which have been prioritised over all other NHS work now - could be making the same error that my ex-wife made. Yes it is important to treat the sick, but all the sick, not just the covid sick; moreover, the reason they need to be treated is to keep the economy going. The economy pays for the NHS; if there is anyone who thinks that the NHS is more important than, say, the hospitality sector, let them take a ten percent pay cut, for hospitality contributes, I believe, ten percent of tax income to the exchequer. 

Lockdowns, and other NPIs, have cost the economy a rumoured £400bn over the last two years - government support measures alone totalled £315bn, resulting in government borrowing reaching levels not seen since WWII. More variants will emerge, and, if we are to behave with them as we have done with Omicron, more borrowing will ensue. Our debts will become larger, and less manageable. Yet there are calls from many for ‘more lockdowns’.  

Professor Carl Heneghan has said that we are in danger of having annual lockdowns, and asked the question ‘when are we going to treat people like adults?’ This is an important point, that individuals should be allowed, perhaps encouraged, to understand risks and how to manage them, but there is also the point of the massive cost of stopping and starting the economy each time there is something to worry about. There was a reason for the ‘Keep Calm and Carry On’ signs in WWII, or politicians don’t seem to understand that.  

If, as Prof. Heneghan suggests, we end up having annual lockdowns, our economy will be shattered. Eventually - when interest rates are well into double figures, because of the level of government debt - the cost of lockdowns may become apparent to the majority, rather like, in the end, my now ex-wife had to face reality regarding her attitude to our debts. The madness has to end. 

+ + +

The problem we have is that great damage will be done to this country if the madness goes on too long, rather as great damage was done to my and my ex-wife’s relationship. There are many in the media who seem to relish in the suffering that is being caused, crying out that the government isn’t being tough enough. Why do they want to punish ordinary people? What have they got against me, and you?

What do you think?