+- WBAUnofficial (https://wbaunofficial.org.uk)
+-- Forum: WBAUnofficial (https://wbaunofficial.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Politics (https://wbaunofficial.org.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Boris says go back to work (/showthread.php?tid=10282)
RE: Boris says go back to work - The liquidator - 05-11-2020
Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
RE: Boris says go back to work - chasetownbaggie - 05-11-2020
(05-11-2020, 09:57 PM)The liquidator Wrote: Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
To be totally honest, if there's one thing I'd be very reluctant to do at this moment in time, it would be having to travel on a bus. I'm glad I won't have that dilemma.
RE: Boris says go back to work - baggy1 - 05-12-2020
(05-11-2020, 09:57 PM)The liquidator Wrote: Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
She only had a test last week, I am really hoping that she doesn't go on public transport. Hope it all went well Liq, have you had the results yet?
(05-11-2020, 09:26 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:05 PM)baggy1 Wrote: But how do you expect to run an economy with just the under 45s? Because you either have to risk the rest of society or shield them, this isn’t about % chance, this is about definitive numbers of deaths.
I don't expect to run an economy on under 45s. I said I think this should be the focus of how we move forward. Not literally under 45s go out, everyone else stay in! That would be barmy. I don't pretend to have the answer to every practicality, but I think it has to be based around these statistics by age group.
I'm more worried about how you run an economy if the lockdown goes on and on, and I'm very worried how the poor will be disproportionately affected in the medium to long term. But again, I'm not even giving an opinion on when lockdown should be lifted, I'm saying the debate should include all these factors I'm talking about, not just covid deaths.
% chance is based on a definitive number of deaths in each age group, that's the point of detailed statistical analysis.
But the massive point that you are missing with the 'over 45s seem to be at less risk' approach is that they still carry the disease which will increase the rate of spread. IN the figures I have quoted there is clear evidence that those over 45 are at risk, and also the reason we have kept the virus contained is because we have had the lockdown - we release the lockdown, we release the virus.
The Govt have fucked this up at every step and are now trying to shoehorn a solution in that wouldn't have been needed if they'd have done their job properly in the 1st place. If we'd have locked down early, if Boris would have attended COBRA meetings, if we'd have arranged to increase the PPE early, if we'd have looked at a proper testing regime earlier, if we'd have taken any of these steps we would have been in a better position now and maybe ready to go back to work. They didn't and we aren't - simple. We can't release early because of the almighty fuck up orchestrated by Boris and his bunch of clueless goons.
RE: Boris says go back to work - Derek Hardballs - 05-12-2020
Am I missing something here? I thought the idea was to have a rigorous community wide testing regime / plan / operation in place first, easing of lockdown after this point so we can isolate effectively outbreaks of the virus?
What we now have is a government going cap in hand to a company at the centre of a multimillion pound publicly funded scandal who are STILL recruiting people. An App system that is still being tested when there were perfectly good ones already created and working around the globe and yet we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
RE: Boris says go back to work - backsidebaggie - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 07:59 AM)baggy1 Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:57 PM)The liquidator Wrote: Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
She only had a test last week, I am really hoping that she doesn't go on public transport. Hope it all went well Liq, have you had the results yet?
(05-11-2020, 09:26 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:05 PM)baggy1 Wrote: But how do you expect to run an economy with just the under 45s? Because you either have to risk the rest of society or shield them, this isn’t about % chance, this is about definitive numbers of deaths.
I don't expect to run an economy on under 45s. I said I think this should be the focus of how we move forward. Not literally under 45s go out, everyone else stay in! That would be barmy. I don't pretend to have the answer to every practicality, but I think it has to be based around these statistics by age group.
I'm more worried about how you run an economy if the lockdown goes on and on, and I'm very worried how the poor will be disproportionately affected in the medium to long term. But again, I'm not even giving an opinion on when lockdown should be lifted, I'm saying the debate should include all these factors I'm talking about, not just covid deaths.
% chance is based on a definitive number of deaths in each age group, that's the point of detailed statistical analysis.
But the massive point that you are missing with the 'over 45s seem to be at less risk' approach is that they still carry the disease which will increase the rate of spread. IN the figures I have quoted there is clear evidence that those over 45 are at risk, and also the reason we have kept the virus contained is because we have had the lockdown - we release the lockdown, we release the virus.
The Govt have fucked this up at every step and are now trying to shoehorn a solution in that wouldn't have been needed if they'd have done their job properly in the 1st place. If we'd have locked down early, if Boris would have attended COBRA meetings, if we'd have arranged to increase the PPE early, if we'd have looked at a proper testing regime earlier, if we'd have taken any of these steps we would have been in a better position now and maybe ready to go back to work. They didn't and we aren't - simple. We can't release early because of the almighty fuck up orchestrated by Boris and his bunch of clueless goons.
I’m well aware the u45s still spread it. I’m not saying they have no risk. I’m saying I think moving forward, the easing of measures should be based around age. That’s all!
Unless we stay in lockdown for 18 months, which is not feasible at all, then unfortunately some people will be at risk. There’s no way around that.
As for the government fucking it up from the beginning, I’ve not even commented on that.
RE: Boris says go back to work - Protheroe - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 08:57 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
I can't go to the pub, I can't go for a curry & I can't hug my dying mother.
Yes, we've eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
RE: Boris says go back to work - Derek Hardballs - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 09:00 AM)Protheroe Wrote:(05-12-2020, 08:57 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
I can't go to the pub, I can't go for a curry & I can't hug my dying mother.
Yes, we've eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
You can get a takeaway, you can jump on the underground, catch a bus, you can exercise as much as you like, go for drives and go to some shops as long as you are 2mtres away from others, you can play golf, tennis with a friend, go fishing. You can see a grandparent or relative (just the one oddly) as long as you are outside. You can go to work (bosses can stay safely at home). Yep rock solid lockdown but luckily if we all stay ALERT we shall spot the pesky virus before it gets us and our family.
(05-12-2020, 08:58 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-12-2020, 07:59 AM)baggy1 Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:57 PM)The liquidator Wrote: Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
She only had a test last week, I am really hoping that she doesn't go on public transport. Hope it all went well Liq, have you had the results yet?
(05-11-2020, 09:26 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:05 PM)baggy1 Wrote: But how do you expect to run an economy with just the under 45s? Because you either have to risk the rest of society or shield them, this isn’t about % chance, this is about definitive numbers of deaths.
I don't expect to run an economy on under 45s. I said I think this should be the focus of how we move forward. Not literally under 45s go out, everyone else stay in! That would be barmy. I don't pretend to have the answer to every practicality, but I think it has to be based around these statistics by age group.
I'm more worried about how you run an economy if the lockdown goes on and on, and I'm very worried how the poor will be disproportionately affected in the medium to long term. But again, I'm not even giving an opinion on when lockdown should be lifted, I'm saying the debate should include all these factors I'm talking about, not just covid deaths.
% chance is based on a definitive number of deaths in each age group, that's the point of detailed statistical analysis.
But the massive point that you are missing with the 'over 45s seem to be at less risk' approach is that they still carry the disease which will increase the rate of spread. IN the figures I have quoted there is clear evidence that those over 45 are at risk, and also the reason we have kept the virus contained is because we have had the lockdown - we release the lockdown, we release the virus.
The Govt have fucked this up at every step and are now trying to shoehorn a solution in that wouldn't have been needed if they'd have done their job properly in the 1st place. If we'd have locked down early, if Boris would have attended COBRA meetings, if we'd have arranged to increase the PPE early, if we'd have looked at a proper testing regime earlier, if we'd have taken any of these steps we would have been in a better position now and maybe ready to go back to work. They didn't and we aren't - simple. We can't release early because of the almighty fuck up orchestrated by Boris and his bunch of clueless goons.
I’m well aware the u45s still spread it. I’m not saying they have no risk. I’m saying I think moving forward, the easing of measures should be based around age. That’s all!
Unless we stay in lockdown for 18 months, which is not feasible at all, then unfortunately some people will be at risk. There’s no way around that.
As for the government fucking it up from the beginning, I’ve not even commented on that.
It should be based on vulnerability of those who are shielding and those that looking after them. That will of course mean the elderly but what about many of the disabled, those with underlying health conditions, those that look after them, those that have bothers and sisters sharing a house with them etc etc? It really isn’t as simple as just keep the elderly at home to protect the economy. The truly vulnerable will be the victims in this not ‘libertarian’s’ (strangely its only ever their liberty that concerns them) who are the main people pushing an early easing of lockdown whilst dressing it up as concern for others.
RE: Boris says go back to work - JOK - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 09:27 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:Pubs closed.(05-12-2020, 09:00 AM)Protheroe Wrote:(05-12-2020, 08:57 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
I can't go to the pub, I can't go for a curry & I can't hug my dying mother.
Yes, we've eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
You can get a takeaway, you can jump on the underground, catch a bus, you can exercise as much as you like, go for drives and go to some shops as long as you are 2mtres away from others, you can play golf, tennis with a friend, go fishing. You can see a grandparent or relative (just the one oddly) as long as you are outside. You can go to work (bosses can stay safely at home). Yep rock solid lockdown but luckily if we all stay ALERT we shall spot the pesky virus before it gets us and our family.
Restaurants closed.
Theatres closed
Barbers / Hairdressers closed,
Small, no essential goods, shops closed,
No physical contact with family and friends.
Hotels closed.
Theme parks closed.
Self catering destinations closed.
B&Bs closed.
Heritage sites closed.
Enclosed venues closed.
Unless social distancing can be maintained, businesses still closed.
Supermarkets still to ensure social distancing rules.
Sports centres closed.
Registered mail and signed for packages left unsigned.
Libraries closed.
Museums closed.
Garden centres only allowed open with strict Social Distancing measures.
Care homes closed to visitors. (So I can’t visit my 99 year old mother who contracted the virus)
People who have been working from home to continue to do so.
Dentist closed with only limited emergency work available.
Schools still closed for most pupils.
Sport only allowed with members of your household (Don’t class golf as a sport).
Over 70s still told to isolate, even if fit and active.
But apart from that, we “have eased lockdown to a point where it makes a mockery”.
We have Been able to catch a bus and travel on the underground since day one.
Yep, I’m really pleased things are getting back to normal!
RE: Boris says go back to work - Shabby Russian - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 09:00 AM)Protheroe Wrote:(05-12-2020, 08:57 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
I can't go to the pub, I can't go for a curry & I can't hug my dying mother.
Yes, we've eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
It must be hugely distressing for you that you cannot spend more time with your mother at this time.
But without some form of Government action this would also be the case for so many more people. There were two really scary things to come out of last night's press conference, one was Johnson's car crash performance, the other was when of the scientists suggested that believe only 10% (and more likely less than that) of the population has had covid 19.
That figure indicates that the lockdown strategy has worked in that only a small percentage of the population has caught this virus, and that consequently the NHS has been able to cope with those who have had the misfortune to catch it.
If the virus had been allowed free reign to sweep through our country unchecked, we would not have been able to cope, and there would have been many people dying alone in hospitals without the comfort of their loved ones, and many dying alone at home without the medical care they needed.
There have been over 30,000 deaths even with lockdown, and 10% of the population getting the virus. What would have happened if that figure had been 50%. I shudder to think.
I am reluctant to criticise the Govt at this moment - yes there are strategies I don't understand or think were wrong, but I am not an expert in this field, I just don't know. But my gut instinct tells me that if we are to get out of this mess as soon as is possible, we need to reduce the current rate of infection (the r number ) further.We need to be able to isolate future outbreaks of the virus (inevitably there will be)
Most important of all is we need to increase public confidence that their chances of getting the virus is remote. Because you can release the country from lockdown as much as you want, but you can't force people to send their children to school, you cannot force them to start going to shops, visit pubs/restaurants, cinema, sporting events etc, if they do not believe it is safe for them and their family to do so.
RE: Boris says go back to work - backsidebaggie - 05-12-2020
(05-12-2020, 09:27 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:(05-12-2020, 09:00 AM)Protheroe Wrote:(05-12-2020, 08:57 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: we have eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
I can't go to the pub, I can't go for a curry & I can't hug my dying mother.
Yes, we've eased lockdown to the point that it makes a mockery of the term.
You can get a takeaway, you can jump on the underground, catch a bus, you can exercise as much as you like, go for drives and go to some shops as long as you are 2mtres away from others, you can play golf, tennis with a friend, go fishing. You can see a grandparent or relative (just the one oddly) as long as you are outside. You can go to work (bosses can stay safely at home). Yep rock solid lockdown but luckily if we all stay ALERT we shall spot the pesky virus before it gets us and our family.
(05-12-2020, 08:58 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-12-2020, 07:59 AM)baggy1 Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:57 PM)The liquidator Wrote: Some people are taking the raving piss staying at home it's like one big holiday in the back garden.....and my wife is on it....the sooner she is back at work the better for normality because the longer people are off they dont want to go back ....my wife is refusing to go on public transport.
She only had a test last week, I am really hoping that she doesn't go on public transport. Hope it all went well Liq, have you had the results yet?
(05-11-2020, 09:26 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote:(05-11-2020, 09:05 PM)baggy1 Wrote: But how do you expect to run an economy with just the under 45s? Because you either have to risk the rest of society or shield them, this isn’t about % chance, this is about definitive numbers of deaths.
I don't expect to run an economy on under 45s. I said I think this should be the focus of how we move forward. Not literally under 45s go out, everyone else stay in! That would be barmy. I don't pretend to have the answer to every practicality, but I think it has to be based around these statistics by age group.
I'm more worried about how you run an economy if the lockdown goes on and on, and I'm very worried how the poor will be disproportionately affected in the medium to long term. But again, I'm not even giving an opinion on when lockdown should be lifted, I'm saying the debate should include all these factors I'm talking about, not just covid deaths.
% chance is based on a definitive number of deaths in each age group, that's the point of detailed statistical analysis.
But the massive point that you are missing with the 'over 45s seem to be at less risk' approach is that they still carry the disease which will increase the rate of spread. IN the figures I have quoted there is clear evidence that those over 45 are at risk, and also the reason we have kept the virus contained is because we have had the lockdown - we release the lockdown, we release the virus.
The Govt have fucked this up at every step and are now trying to shoehorn a solution in that wouldn't have been needed if they'd have done their job properly in the 1st place. If we'd have locked down early, if Boris would have attended COBRA meetings, if we'd have arranged to increase the PPE early, if we'd have looked at a proper testing regime earlier, if we'd have taken any of these steps we would have been in a better position now and maybe ready to go back to work. They didn't and we aren't - simple. We can't release early because of the almighty fuck up orchestrated by Boris and his bunch of clueless goons.
I’m well aware the u45s still spread it. I’m not saying they have no risk. I’m saying I think moving forward, the easing of measures should be based around age. That’s all!
Unless we stay in lockdown for 18 months, which is not feasible at all, then unfortunately some people will be at risk. There’s no way around that.
As for the government fucking it up from the beginning, I’ve not even commented on that.
It should be based on vulnerability of those who are shielding and those that looking after them. That will of course mean the elderly but what about many of the disabled, those with underlying health conditions, those that look after them, those that have bothers and sisters sharing a house with them etc etc? It really isn’t as simple as just keep the elderly at home to protect the economy. The truly vulnerable will be the victims in this not ‘libertarian’s’ (strangely its only ever their liberty that concerns them) who are the main people pushing an early easing of lockdown whilst dressing it up as concern for others.
I agree it’s not as simple as that, I said the practicalities are difficult. I agree it’s not as simple as just keeping the elderly at home. But it’s also not as simple as keeping lockdown week after week as i believe the poor will be absolutely shafted by the economic damage. I don’t envy those who have to make these decisions.