Cost25 Sep 2020 10:26
I can understand why people are getting het up about costs - the daily £4 and the cost of the readers. But I think it's a classic case of not understanding the scale of state spending. If everyone in the country had a daily test (unnecessary, not everyone is going somewhere every day) you're talking what £70bn/year if gov funded it all. Have a quick look at what we are currently spending on furlough, unemployment benefits, moonshot, whatever.
People also seem hung up on the inequality angle. This isn't anything new. How do we solve it for other medical situations? Well, we give out free prescriptions to those who can't afford them, for example. So reality might look like the government subsidising some of the cost (let's say half - does £2/test feel more palatable, for a cost to gov of perhaps £25bn/year?). Or, they might make them available for free to people on low incomes. There are other options too: you could mandate tests for hospitality workers, for example, and the cost of 10/20 staff in a pub being tested would be recouped pretty quickly.
Agree the presentation wasn't as slick as it might have been but I think this is a case of people not understanding a transformational technology. I may be proven wrong in time but I'm not selling any of my shares.