Schools to open or not?

[JOK]

Dishonest how? I never said that article was the one to rule them all, just that it matched my views. The central point of the article remains: children are not super-spreaders. Therefore, if adults can go back to work, children should be able to go back to school.

The Olivers and Graces of the parents on this bored may be absolutely fine at home, but lots of children will be suffering at home.

I cannot see the logic until waiting until September to send all children back to school together, particularly as September is closer to winter and therefore flu season. It's far better to have a staggered return, which my children will hopefully be participating in, as both are eager to go back to school.

Sounds a touch like the politics of envy there.

The Beyoncé s and Jaydons of the knucklehead parents will still be struggling when they get back to school. Because their parents take very little interest in their offspring’s education. Then are quite happy to blame the school when poor little Skywalker and Preshuss don’t do well. (The later a genuine name I encountered. Presumably intended to be Precious)
Don’t be discriminatory or sneeringly dismissive against some parents because they invest time and effort on their children. A commodity all parents have available at present. And schools are sending out lesson plans for all pupils irrespective level or background, it is irrelevant to the school. If some parents choose to spend 2 or more hours extra per day, compared to others, trying to educate their children, good on them. 
Perhaps all parents will now appreciate the worth of teachers. Not such a cushy number after all.

As far as not being “Super Spreaders”. Within weeks of the autumn term starting a good quarter of staff will have come down with some lurgy or other the kids have bought in

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52701850

[The liquidator]

Some of these parents will expect 6 weeks on full pay ....

[Fido]

Fido and Liq will be on in a minute proclaiming anyone who disagrees with them has been shoed and then not able to back up their assertion.

The difference is that Borin'Baggie seems to have a decent knowledge about this, presents his case well and gives evidence. You, on the other hand seem keen to pass judgement on a minute-to-minute basis on subjects you know little about and with very little, if any, evidence whatsoever to be shot down in flames by someone like JOK who has gone to the trouble to do so.

[The liquidator]

Got to say there is some knowledgeable people on here dont know if its through rose tinted specs what they see .

Me I ain't got a clue on all these scientists .

[Derek Hardballs]

Fido and Liq will be on in a minute proclaiming anyone who disagrees with them has been shoed and then not able to back up their assertion.

The difference is that Borin'Baggie seems to have a decent knowledge about this, presents his case well and gives evidence. You, on the other hand seem keen to pass judgement on a minute-to-minute basis on subjects you know little about and with very little, if any, evidence whatsoever to be shot down in flames by someone like JOK who has gone to the trouble to do so.

I haven’t tried to say I’m an expert I said I find it hard to trust the government and that in absence of that trust I looked to experts not associated with them to form an opinion. Whether I have chosen the right path based on who I find personally more trust worthy only time will tell. Aside from that I see no reason to send the kids back until September to allow schools and staff to feel safe and get organised.

[Protheroe]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

I find it hard to trust the government and that in absence of that trust I looked to experts not associated with them to form an opinion

I find it hard to trust the government AND the experts. The experts are clearly wrong, and the government has hidden behind their ridiculous assertions.

There is a miniscule risk to the vast majority of people in this country.

[Shabby Russian]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

I find it hard to trust the government and that in absence of that trust I looked to experts not associated with them to form an opinion

I find it hard to trust the government AND the experts. The experts are clearly wrong, and the government has hidden behind their ridiculous assertions.

There is a miniscule risk to the vast majority of people in this country.

Is that miniscule risk of infection or getting seriously ill ? There is a difference.

The risk of infection has in the past month reduced but that is due to the lockdown policy of the Govt, without that policy I am not sure it would have been correct to say there was minimal risk of getting the virus.

[Sunshine]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

I find it hard to trust the government and that in absence of that trust I looked to experts not associated with them to form an opinion

I find it hard to trust the government AND the experts. The experts are clearly wrong, and the government has hidden behind their ridiculous assertions.

There is a miniscule risk to the vast majority of people in this country.

Why is the UK death rate the worst in Europe?

[baggy1]

What Proth is saying is that for the under 65s statistics show that there is less chance of dying from this (that the over 65s) which is correct, and for the under 45s there is very little change in year on year deaths for the age group indicating they have miniscule risk of getting seriously ill. And as the over 65s are only 20% of the population the vast majority (80%) aren't at risk.

However there is a couple of points missed here which are that these figures have come about during a lockdown, we haven't got a good sight of what happens with 'back to normal' with restrictions yet. When it was 'normal', the infections were increasing exponentially. And that there isn't a clear view as to what we do with the over 65s - do we shield them all as by releasing the lockdown the virus will spread. That's around 12 million people that seem to being moved out of the way because they are a bit inconvenient to getting back to normal.

[Squid]

Dishonest how? I never said that article was the one to rule them all, just that it matched my views. The central point of the article remains: children are not super-spreaders. Therefore, if adults can go back to work, children should be able to go back to school.

The Olivers and Graces of the parents on this bored may be absolutely fine at home, but lots of children will be suffering at home.

I cannot see the logic until waiting until September to send all children back to school together, particularly as September is closer to winter and therefore flu season. It's far better to have a staggered return, which my children will hopefully be participating in, as both are eager to go back to school.

Sounds a touch like the politics of envy there.

The Beyoncé s and Jaydons of the knucklehead parents will still be struggling when they get back to school. Because their parents take very little interest in their offspring’s education. Then are quite happy to blame the school when poor little Skywalker and Preshuss don’t do well. (The later a genuine name I encountered. Presumably intended to be Precious)
Don’t be discriminatory or sneeringly dismissive against some parents because they invest time and effort on their children. A commodity all parents have available at present. And schools are sending out lesson plans for all pupils irrespective level or background, it is irrelevant to the school. If some parents choose to spend 2 or more hours extra per day, compared to others, trying to educate their children, good on them. 
Perhaps all parents will now appreciate the worth of teachers. Not such a cushy number after all.

As far as not being “Super Spreaders”. Within weeks of the autumn term starting a good quarter of staff will have come down with some lurgy or other the kids have bought in

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52701850

Thinking of the welfare of vulnerable children is not "the politics of envy". And no, not all schools are providing the same level of educational activity. Keeping schools closed will worsen disadvantage.

As I've said previously, we are not all in this together and the social and economic costs of lockdown are not being borne equally

It is not possible to keep all children away from school until there is a vaccine. Therefore a return to school is inevitable. (So no, it is not like talking about the earth being flat). The discussion is then when is the best time for that to happen.

I don't see a nationwide starting point of September as feasible, particularly as it marks the consent of the winter cold and flu season. It makes far more sense to have staggered reintegration. I've had contact from the head and the council and schools in our area should be accepting pupils from next month.

For anyone asking why we have such a high death rate, the Munro review stats showing the high levels of inequality in the UK are a big clue. Life expectancy has recently plateaued. Educational attainment is a key factor in perpetuating inequality, but apparently stating this makes you both a government lackey and speaking politics of envy.