Shocking article

I got a Metro link

Lara that’s the trouble with only giving The Guardian’s short slant on this economic bit of journalism by a Telegraph
Writer.
The full piece does need to be read.

Lara unless we subscribe to The Telegraph we cannot read the article itself, only another journalist's view of it, which you have linked.

This does not give us a true picture so it is difficult to comment.

It is not that the journalist has said anything that is not true, in fact one reaction to the article might have been "no sh*t Sherlock" it is that once the idea has been given a platform in a respected mainstream media outlet, then it can start to creep into mainstream thinking.
There is already enough blame being heaped on the older generation for most of the ills of the world.

I wonder if it ever occurred to him that one day he will fall into that category, and I hope he remembers his comments if he reaches that age. He may just feel different about 'culling' the aged then. (Makes me feel like a badger...)

Baggs
It got people reading though, didn't it? Which was the purpose of the op.
Footfall has been very slow on this site of late and as we know GN is a business that receives revenue from advertisers.
These people will not pay £thousands to advertise here if no ones reading.

Baggs

Similar minds.

To be honest I am surprised it was GNHQ who started this thread without giving us the opportunity to read the article in full as we have both said to ' contextualise' what was said to give our ' thoughts'.

The only ' thought' I have is I am left wondering what angle was behind the OP in the first place because it was instigated by GNHQ.

I never noticed any bothering before when posters were talking crassly about the elderly dying to take votes in a direction to suit their opinion over the EU Referendum. I remember a sensible thread from ages ago where the discussion was ' the over population of the world ' and like the article it was not shy of mentioning the fact we are living longer and the financial/social implications of that. Fair enough it wasn't calling for ' culling ' but unless I have misread the article neither did Jeremy Warner in his article.

I admit to being a tad hypocritical as I was so annoyed by those who would repeatedly used the ' death ' of UK pensioners as a good thing if there was another EU Referendum as they could no longer vote. Some posters appeared to relish the thought of pensioners dying. That was more personal and ' shocking ' than an article discussing the financial impact of the Coronavirus.

Hear, hear, POGS

Many on here are guilty of crowing at the thought that Brexit voters will have died post referendum

Greymar
Not to mention heartless journalists.

In fact, perhaps we would all be happier if most journalists were culled!

The only talk of that kind is that it is CORONAVIRUS that is killing off the elderly moreso than younger people.

People are not killing the elderly off; a VIRUS is.

Spanish Flu, another VIRUS, killed off younger people so was devastating in a different way both economically and on a human level.

There should not be all this talk about killing off the elderly because they have served their purpose. I am doing as much as I can to stay as healthy as possible and I hope as many of you on GN are doing the same. I think it is unkind for people to say much money can be saved in pensions etc, when they die.

I worked caring for older people until I got back problems.
Many times I had clients that unfortunately became ill and went into hospital, usually I knew the ones it would be that did not make it and come home. These people were not my family but I always felt much sadness at the death of one of them.
We may be getting older nobody should be condemning us to the coffin boxes before our time.

The article, not just a shocked reference to a tiny part of it: Does the Fed know something the rest of us do not with its panicked interest rate cut?.

Paywalled. I don't have a subscription but I know a man who....

So, all in all, another "Give me strength!" moment.

???

PS Hi, POGS! ? I see you had similar thoughts.

message Juliet27 Fri 13-Mar-20 11:34:55
???
Same here for us!
#poorergran
?

The journalist was making a comparison between the economic effects of the Spanish flu at the end of WW1 and those of Covid19. And disinterested means impartial/not influenced by private feelings, not uninterested.

"However, there are some key differences, not least the fact that the Spanish flu disproportionately affected those of prime work age, whereas the coronavirus primarily kills the elderly. In the First World War outbreak there was thus a lasting impact on supply, with many families suffering the loss of the primary bread-winner.

This is quite unlikely to occur this time around. Not to put too fine a point on it, from an entirely disinterested economic perspective, the COVID-19 might even prove mildly beneficial in the long term by disproportionately culling elderly dependents."

If you read the entire article you might just get the idea he's talking about global economics, not wishing death on old people.

Found it and, yup, suspicions confirmed. GN is definitely getting like the dafter side of Twatter Twitter.

Go to the SOURCE before you start getting outraged!

I'd appreciate a link to the actual column that is referred to if anyone has it. I have tried to find it but can't. Until then I suspect the usual has happened: a quote has been given out of context where context might make a difference.

I notice a few people have commented on the logicality of the quoted sentence. I'd add to that that a thing can be logically true, or true in theory, without whoever says it wanting it to happen.

" thinning out" Disgusting.

Lara

Could you put a link to the article in it's ' ENTIREITY ' for posters to read / see for themselves ' THE CONTEXT ' behind the Jeremy Warner article :-

'Does the Fed know something the rest of us do not with its panicked interest rate cut?'
---
I am sure you will agree ' the context' could be viewed differently by posters and context is ways important to make an ' informed' comment.

For Gransnet to ask for ' thoughts' over the article if only one or two paragraphs from the article are produced from another newspaper for debate/discussion and that paper is referring to a specific word ' cull ' it is intentionally concentrating on the use of the word without contextualising the reason for it's use in the article. The journalist himself in ' your' link to the Metro said:-

' Responding to criticism in the article’s comments section, Warner said ‘on reflection’, he should not have used the word ‘cull’. But he said he is ‘unrepentant about the economic point I was trying to make’. He wrote: ‘Any thinning out of those of prime working age is a much bigger supply shock than the same thing among elderly retirees. ‘Obviously, for those affected it is a human tragedy whatever the age, but this is a piece about economics, not the sum of human misery.’

There may be posters who are adamantly opposed to his article and will find it crass but I have just read it and it did make me think he could have made his point more delicately but I am not particularly a delicate flower so I found no real problem with his article, others will view the article differently.

I admit to being a tad hypocritical as I was so annoyed by those who would repeatedly used the ' death ' of UK pensioners as a good thing if there was another EU Referendum as they could no longer vote. Some posters appeared to relish the thought of pensioners dying. That was more personal and ' shocking ' than an article discussing the financial impact of the Coronavirus.

PS
I do not subscribe to the Telegraph and the article is behind a pay wall but I have found if you keep at it you can eventually read the article in it's entirety , if you don't loose the will.

Well then the logic would follow to get rid of the disabled, the severely mentally ill and the chronically sick as well. All non productive and all using up vital resources. Why don’t we just euthanise everyone at 85 or younger? Stupid article.

^ Apparently if you have symptoms you should use a seperate bathroom from all the other members of the household. Most houses in this area are local authority so ONE bathroom per house ,seems that "experts" have no idea how the common folk live.^
Perhaps we’re meant to pop next door!! ?

A disgusting article/attitude and that seems to be rife amongst some people. I hate this business of bringing into it economics - I worked from being 15 years as did my other half (he devoted his life to the NHS when he qualified), we paid our taxes etc and are still doing. We are entitled to our pensions and the meagre benefits (if any) we receive from the system.
What a digraceful attitude. I cannot express how it makes me feel.

This virus aims at 50 year old " healthy "men in Australia !? 40/50 and 60 is the general consensus. It's not an age -related disease.

I'm glad/ grateful ( for myself ), but by no means smug, when I say that if the NHS had relied on me for admissions, there wouldn't be any hospitals so the moral is that not ALL us elderly people are reliant on the services that we seem to be cursed for.

It's not us who are draining the system !! and I do take Umbridge at such articles.