Given that you ignored the suggestion, it seems like you don’t know of any better targets to fund for PPE distribution
I am not claiming they should have gone to me for advice, I am claiming they should have followed procedures which are designed to get things done. It’s a fallacy that you can cut corners and still get equally good results.
Generally, things are not getting done in the last decades since those procedures were introduced and a lot more got done in Moses time when those procedures didn’t exist. See the debate on the Great Stagnation.
The main point of Brexit from Cummings side was to be able to deregulate and escape the Great Stagnation.
If you think that the bureaucracy that stiffled everything is helpful here, point to where you think the bureaucracy should have redirected the money towards.
Which things aren’t getting done? The vaccine rollout was a big success, the track and trace system was an expensive failure. Its possible to look at evidence, you don’t have to just pick a narrative.
The main point of Brexit from Cummings side was to be able to deregulate and escape the Great Stagnation
That was the theory. Yet his attempt to fast track PPE was a failure in practice .
At what point is the theory revised according to the evidence?
where you think the bureaucracy should have redirected the money towards.
Someone who had PPE. It isn’t difficult to do better than complete failure.
The Government’s PPE team has been working since at least September to stem the flow of kit from the Far East. Staff have been negotiating with suppliers to exit contracts and delay PPE production, say senior procurement sources in the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS.
That sounds like the Cummings strategy succeeded in producing more then necessary PPE for the autumn/winter. They did spent a bunch of money for it, but PPE was really important so it’s worthwhile to pay more to actually get the PPE that’s needed.
The costs of lockdowns is very huge. Compared to that the cost for PPE, vaccines and scientific research isn’t that high so it makes sense to invest more capital into it instead of trying to save money and then ending up with to little.
I am not claiming they should have gone to me for advice, I am claiming they should have followed procedures which are designed to get things done. It’s a fallacy that you can cut corners and still get equally good results.
Generally, things are not getting done in the last decades since those procedures were introduced and a lot more got done in Moses time when those procedures didn’t exist. See the debate on the Great Stagnation.
The main point of Brexit from Cummings side was to be able to deregulate and escape the Great Stagnation.
If you think that the bureaucracy that stiffled everything is helpful here, point to where you think the bureaucracy should have redirected the money towards.
Which things aren’t getting done? The vaccine rollout was a big success, the track and trace system was an expensive failure. Its possible to look at evidence, you don’t have to just pick a narrative.
That was the theory. Yet his attempt to fast track PPE was a failure in practice . At what point is the theory revised according to the evidence?
Someone who had PPE. It isn’t difficult to do better than complete failure.
You haven’t demonstrated that it was a failure and another strategy would have produced more PPE.
If I google I find statements like:
That sounds like the Cummings strategy succeeded in producing more then necessary PPE for the autumn/winter. They did spent a bunch of money for it, but PPE was really important so it’s worthwhile to pay more to actually get the PPE that’s needed.
It’s worthwhile up to a point. Wasting money costs lives as well.
The costs of lockdowns is very huge. Compared to that the cost for PPE, vaccines and scientific research isn’t that high so it makes sense to invest more capital into it instead of trying to save money and then ending up with to little.
Its not an either/or thing. PPE,.lockdowns and travel bans were all needed simultaneously in early 2020.
There’s been an investigation, which the BMJ article summarised.