We face the risk of an economic downturn of almost unprecedented scale as a result. Of course, this may not happen, but the likelihood is that it will.
I am expecting the shortfall in government revenue that results from this to make the deficit of 2008 look to be of modest proportion.
The likely loss of GDP is at present almost impossible to estimate, but I am expecting it to be substantial.
An actual economist who has modelled the effects of a pandemic:
This ‘direct’ impact of the pandemic will reduce GDP in that quarter by a few percentage points. The precise number will depend on what proportion of the population that get sick, on what the fatality rate in the UK turns out to be, and how many people miss work in an attempt not to get the disease. The impact on GDP for the whole year following the pandemic is much less at around 1% or 2%, partly because output after the pandemic quarter is higher as firms replenish diminished stocks and meet postponed demand.
This is, once again, the usual Snippa problem. Which is to ignore that other people have already chewed through the problems that he’s starting at afresh. And that it would really aid his thought processes to go look at what these other people have worked out.
That is, not all economics previous to the Sage of Ely is to be disregarded. Instead there are interesting things to be known as a result of tens of thousands of clever people having chewed through a lot of scenarios over the past few centuries. That Spudda’s entirely ignorant of the conclusions they reached is only one reason why his own output is so miserably tuberous.