1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Jun 27, 2020 15:50:47 GMT
âWho would be one of them in a week's time when the pubs turn out?â
Sadly there will be many who do not have the choice of which many will be ârestingâ Theatre professionals who as freelancers have fallen through the furlough and small business safety net.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jun 27, 2020 16:59:08 GMT
I think it's telling two industries, the arts and Universities seen as anti tory are being shafted - the new plans for uni's will shrink them a lot. They are picking fights with selected areas to distract from their utter failure. Lockdown too late and too weak, so that we never came close, in England, to low enough levels of transmission mean that they need a scapegoat. Who usually gets attacked? Not pubs or shops, itâs âluvviesâ and teachers. In education they have now moved the goalposts to drop any meaningful protection in trying to provoke a battle, the pathetic five point plan for the arts is the same. They want a war as a distraction and their targets are carefully chosen. And Labour are now against the NEU as well. |
|
376 posts
|
Post by hitmewithurbethshot on Jun 27, 2020 18:29:18 GMT
Nope. Wearing gloves doesn't reduce the risk much - perhaps any - more than regular handwashing. What reduces the risk much more? Taking cash out of the equation as far as possible.
Why does the NHS spend money on gloves then if they don't work. Doctors and nurses crucially change gloves between patients, it's not really practical for supermarket workers to change them between customers |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2020 21:03:40 GMT
They are picking fights with selected areas to distract from their utter failure. Lockdown too late and too weak, so that we never came close, in England, to low enough levels of transmission mean that they need a scapegoat. Who usually gets attacked? Not pubs or shops, itâs âluvviesâ and teachers. In education they have now moved the goalposts to drop any meaningful protection in trying to provoke a battle, the pathetic five point plan for the arts is the same. They want a war as a distraction and their targets are carefully chosen. And Labour are now against the NEU as well. Not sure where you got the idea that Labour are of any relevance here. The idea of âall backâ is being seen as highly suspicious by many parents regarding the lack of safety for their children (who would infect each other, then parents, then grandparents some way down the line). Parental surveys are what to look out for, here. Labour are powerless (literally), what they say and do on these issues means very little. |
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jun 29, 2020 13:45:58 GMT
Confused of Finchley here : Iâm reading and hearing of parties and gatherings so is it all over? Can i come out now?
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jun 29, 2020 14:35:31 GMT
Confused of Finchley here : Iâm reading and hearing of parties and gatherings so is it all over? Can i come out now? As of this coming Saturday you can... up to a point:
Whether or not you should is a different question. We locked down too late, we have had one of the highest per-capita death tolls in the world, and we are opening up sooner, in terms of where the rate of daily infections is, than some other countries have done. The government guidelines indicate changes to who you may meet, and where, but they explicitly do not signify an end to social distancing. I'm not saying don't, but I would suggest caution - and perhaps caution over and above what that government website is suggesting.
|
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 29, 2020 21:00:24 GMT
Looking at the US who have done a similar opening to ours, which we are doing this coming Saturday. The consequences of opening too soon is laid bare in the southern states, with Covid infection rates gone through the roof. The opening was supported by Donald Trump and his state governors, is there a general election looming anytime soon? They put wealth before health and didnât listen to the science (Dr Anthony Fauci.)
We will go the same way, where the âRâ rate will go through the roof and we have to lockdown again.
|
|
3,321 posts
|
Post by david on Jun 29, 2020 21:58:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Jun 29, 2020 22:16:19 GMT
In other news it's look for all the jobs that are being cut and risk your health or be sanctioned, just as Leicester goes into lockdown.
|
|
396 posts
|
Post by djp on Jun 30, 2020 3:06:27 GMT
Confused of Finchley here : Iâm reading and hearing of parties and gatherings so is it all over? Can i come out now? As of this coming Saturday you can... up to a point:
Whether or not you should is a different question. We locked down too late, we have had one of the highest per-capita death tolls in the world, and we are opening up sooner, in terms of where the rate of daily infections is, than some other countries have done. The government guidelines indicate changes to who you may meet, and where, but they explicitly do not signify an end to social distancing. I'm not saying don't, but I would suggest caution - and perhaps caution over and above what that government website is suggesting.
We didn't lock down late except with tons of hindsight - the scientists told us to lock down at what they though was the same stage Italy did - because they thought we were weeks behind Italy. There's now no sign in the viral dna record that events like the Liverpool football match had any impact, and the scientists still maintain that banning some things earlier would just have produced the same problem - as people did something else of equal risk instead.
What the scientists missed, was that the returning holiday makers from Italy, France and Spain had actually caused the virus to spread faster than they anticipated, and that may have been because they had no idea- partly due to dud figures from China - how many people would prove to have an asymptomatic but still infectious version of covid. Unlike many countries - like Korea, Spain or Italy - where the virus started from a regional foothold, our holiday makers also started off multiple hot spots whn they returned all over the country at once . And once it did spread, it had the advantage of more, big, dense, cities with more susceptible people in assorted medical and BAME groups.
The same problem remains now - if you want to stop it, you need to both stamp out regional outbreaks, and stop it returning here from outside our borders - where much of the rest the world is still having exponential growth or major re-outbreaks . If you wanted to stop it in March, you needed to close the borders - like Australia , Singapore, Taiwan and New Zealand - and abandon our brits abroad to their fate. No one argued for that.
We now have a situation where government and business has a set of dual problems. The cautious will realise its still about, will maintain social distancing , and continue to avoid activities and confined spaces where it will thrive- which will mean less demand, spending and jobs . The unwise will dash to the pub, or rave, pack like sardines on trains and beaches, and keep the virus fed - which will perpetuate the problem. Business will argue for more opening up. The Treasury will try to avoid a bigger bill, as its in their genes under all governments . And the health interest will be to keep distancing on - not least so the NHS can get back to doing what it hasn't for 4 months.
There's an almost impossible signalling task for government there. Its acceptably safe to do x, but not safe enough to do 2x is difficult to sell. The rules got complicated as the scientists worked through a spread sheet of options looking for what could be done and not change the R number unacceptably . There's good reasons why cricket balls are more risky than pub glasses, theatres can't socially distance economically like Cinemas, and why you don't want to mix with too many other social units. But its all a lot more complex than saying stay at home, and clamping down on the irresponsible groups , may create more problems than can be dealt with.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 7:43:27 GMT
Looking at the US who have done a similar opening to ours, which we are doing this coming Saturday. The consequences of opening too soon is laid bare in the southern states, with Covid infection rates gone through the roof. The opening was supported by Donald Trump and his state governors, is there a general election looming anytime soon? They put wealth before health and didnât listen to the science (Dr Anthony Fauci.) We will go the same way, where the âRâ rate will go through the roof and we have to lockdown again. Do you have a crystal ball? Otherwise what is the need for the doom and gloom? No wonder so many people are getting fed up and ignoring lockdown if people are telling them that effectively we're going to be in some form of lockdown until there is a vaccine. We are not the US, many places in the US opened up much more rapidly and social distancing is basically non-existent in large swathes of the population, much more than it is here. Life is depressing enough without pervasive paranoia and insistence that we stay locked down to avoid a few more people getting the disease. That was never the point, the point was only to ensure the disease remained at a level where the NHS could cope. And it did and it has. So open up we must, because the negative impacts on the economy and people's lives from the lockdown and things other than coronavirus are quickly going to overtake the virus itself, if they haven't already. If you don't want to go outside until there is a cure then that's your prerogative, but on so many levels that just isn't realistic or an option for the vast majority of people. Life is more than coronavirus and it has to move on, with appropriate precautions such as masks and hand cleanliness. |
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Jun 30, 2020 8:20:05 GMT
Looking at the US who have done a similar opening to ours, which we are doing this coming Saturday. The consequences of opening too soon is laid bare in the southern states, with Covid infection rates gone through the roof. The opening was supported by Donald Trump and his state governors, is there a general election looming anytime soon? They put wealth before health and didnât listen to the science (Dr Anthony Fauci.) We will go the same way, where the âRâ rate will go through the roof and we have to lockdown again. If you don't want to go outside until there is a cure then that's your prerogative, but on so many levels that just isn't realistic or an option for the vast majority of people. Life is more than coronavirus and it has to move on, with appropriate precautions such as masks and hand cleanliness. I would argue that actually at the moment life isn't more than coronavirus. This is not something you can just say 'Well it's been three months, it's probably OK to go out". Nothing has changed since we went into lockdown. The virus is still rampant, as proved by Leicester going back into lockdown. Survival is more important than 'getting on with life' at the moment. |
|
|
|
Post by xanady on Jun 30, 2020 8:47:29 GMT
The Heartless Dodger(Boris) visiting Dudley in West Midlands today to announce yet another great plan/review/strategy/new deal/smoke-screen or some other waffle that will never happen in reality.
Wonder if anyone will mention to him that Dudley with a population of 321,000 has the same number of Covid deaths as South Korea with a population of 51 MILLION?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 10:00:56 GMT
If you don't want to go outside until there is a cure then that's your prerogative, but on so many levels that just isn't realistic or an option for the vast majority of people. Life is more than coronavirus and it has to move on, with appropriate precautions such as masks and hand cleanliness. I would argue that actually at the moment life isn't more than coronavirus. This is not something you can just say 'Well it's been three months, it's probably OK to go out". Nothing has changed since we went into lockdown. The virus is still rampant, as proved by Leicester going back into lockdown. Survival is more important than 'getting on with life' at the moment. Ok, so will you pay for everyone to stay at home and do nothing until there is a cure or a vaccine then? I suspect not, so no, life is not just the virus, it can't be. Anyone who sees this is a binary distinction between the virus and everything else is living in a dreamland, because that is not how sustaining an economy so that people can live works. Life has to move on, we have to adapt to live with the virus rather than let it consume our lives entirely as some people on here seem determined to do. I could understand that attitude as a temporary measure when there were hundreds of deaths and thousands of new infections a day and the NHS was close to breaking, but that isn't the case now. What is close to breaking is the economy, people's livelihoods and ability to stay out of poverty, people's health in relation to other illnesses (how many excess deaths from otherwise treatable cancers will there be in the next few years because treatment has been delayed?) and people's mental health. None of those are less important than coronavirus, especially given the virus is now causing so few infections and deaths per day. All deaths are too many, deaths from coronavirus are not the only ones that matter. If some people want to hide away forever until this virus no longer exists, that is their prerogative, but there is no reason for the rest of us to do anything more than wear a mask, wash our hands and shopping and social distance where we can. There will inevitably be infection spikes, as there are with the flu every year, but they have to be taken as they come while otherwise life goes on, or there won't be much life to keep going by the time a vaccine or cure is found. It's all about perspective and proportionality, and there is an increasing lack of wider perspective in the argument to keep locked down. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 10:24:50 GMT
As of this coming Saturday you can... up to a point:
Whether or not you should is a different question. We locked down too late, we have had one of the highest per-capita death tolls in the world, and we are opening up sooner, in terms of where the rate of daily infections is, than some other countries have done. The government guidelines indicate changes to who you may meet, and where, but they explicitly do not signify an end to social distancing. I'm not saying don't, but I would suggest caution - and perhaps caution over and above what that government website is suggesting.
We didn't lock down late except with tons of hindsight - the scientists told us to lock down at what they though was the same stage Italy did - because they thought we were weeks behind Italy. No. Plenty of people knew that we were not locking down early enough. In healthcare and beyond. Those who didn't want to (in SAGE, in government and the public) now must bear the guilt of that. Plenty of us had foresight (even in the general public, as seen on here, although the thread has been deleted from that time). |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jun 30, 2020 10:46:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 10:47:42 GMT
If you don't want to go outside until there is a cure then that's your prerogative, but on so many levels that just isn't realistic or an option for the vast majority of people. Life is more than coronavirus and it has to move on, with appropriate precautions such as masks and hand cleanliness. I would argue that actually at the moment life isn't more than coronavirus. This is not something you can just say 'Well it's been three months, it's probably OK to go out". Nothing has changed since we went into lockdown. The virus is still rampant, as proved by Leicester going back into lockdown. Survival is more important than 'getting on with life' at the moment. I think if you had cancer that needed ongoing treatment to prolong your life, you'd probably disagree. The leading cancer clinicians and researchers where I work are united in believing that over the medium term more people will die of cancer because of Covid than will actually die of Covid. |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jun 30, 2020 10:55:47 GMT
We didn't lock down late except with tons of hindsight - the scientists told us to lock down at what they though was the same stage Italy did - because they thought we were weeks behind Italy. No. Plenty of people knew that we were not locking down early enough. In healthcare and beyond. Those who didn't want to (in SAGE, in government and the public) now must bear the guilt of that. Plenty of us had foresight (even in the general public, as seen on here, although the thread has been deleted from that time). Exactly. See, for example, this:
It is a fact, unfortunately, that thousands - maybe tens of thousands - of people have died because of political choices made by this government. They may claim - they do claim, unconvincingly - that they've been led by the science at every step, but it's transparently obvious they haven't.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jun 30, 2020 13:56:34 GMT
Easyjet think it won't be till 2023 until 2019 passenger numbers are reached again - of course very hard for any company to predict the future at the moment.
|
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jun 30, 2020 17:17:44 GMT
The same problem remains now - if you want to stop it, you need to both stamp out regional outbreaks, and stop it returning here from outside our borders - where much of the rest the world is still having exponential growth or major re-outbreaks . If you wanted to stop it in March, you needed to close the borders - like Australia , Singapore, Taiwan and New Zealand - and abandon our brits abroad to their fate. No one argued for that. I did! If I was in charge of the country I would have closed the UK's borders as soon as we heard about the virus really getting going in China back in January. Mind you, I would have done Brexit by the day after the Referendum closing the UK's borders, blocking up the Channel Tunnel & sending a message to Brussels by carrier pigeon saying "That's it. We've left. Bye." |
|
5,707 posts
|
Post by lynette on Jun 30, 2020 18:44:45 GMT
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but you werenât the only one, dawnstar. But I would have allowed Brtis back in to go home. Until it became obvious that it was gonna get very bad.
|
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jun 30, 2020 19:36:29 GMT
Looking at the US who have done a similar opening to ours, which we are doing this coming Saturday. The consequences of opening too soon is laid bare in the southern states, with Covid infection rates gone through the roof. The opening was supported by Donald Trump and his state governors, is there a general election looming anytime soon? They put wealth before health and didnât listen to the science (Dr Anthony Fauci.) We will go the same way, where the âRâ rate will go through the roof and we have to lockdown again. Do you have a crystal ball? Otherwise what is the need for the doom and gloom? No wonder so many people are getting fed up and ignoring lockdown if people are telling them that effectively we're going to be in some form of lockdown until there is a vaccine. We are not the US, many places in the US opened up much more rapidly and social distancing is basically non-existent in large swathes of the population, much more than it is here. Life is depressing enough without pervasive paranoia and insistence that we stay locked down to avoid a few more people getting the disease. That was never the point, the point was only to ensure the disease remained at a level where the NHS could cope. And it did and it has. So open up we must, because the negative impacts on the economy and people's lives from the lockdown and things other than coronavirus are quickly going to overtake the virus itself, if they haven't already. If you don't want to go outside until there is a cure then that's your prerogative, but on so many levels that just isn't realistic or an option for the vast majority of people. Life is more than coronavirus and it has to move on, with appropriate precautions such as masks and hand cleanliness. We locked down too late, this is agreed on by some right wing commentators now. We are also dealing with a virus that is very infectious, deadly and spreaders do not show any signs when they are spreading the virus, a perfect storm. I did say earlier in this thread that masks enhance out economic freedom, they donât curtail it and sustain our economic freedom, however with freedom comes responsibility and the public have generally been irresponsible by not wearing masks. I have never advocated staying locked down either, but merely observing what I see in the environment around me. So therefore the public being irresponsible will lead to another shutdown, the NHS getting overwhelmed and theatre taking longer to open. I donât have a crystal ball, you are correct. I see when I am out, that people are not social distancing, (look at Bournemouth Beach, BLM protests and Liverpool Anfield celebrations etc.) With restaurants, hairdressers and pubs set to open on Saturday the âRâ will go up again, this will be exasperated when people start to stay inside when the weather becomes cooler and the new flu season happens in 3-6 months or so. So looking at the US where the âRâ rate has gone through the roof and we are following a similar orientation with our re-openings, in some cases the US has been more responsible than us and have insisted that masks are worn in all public areas, including shops. So I am not being neither pervasive and paranoid. Do I recall earlier in this thread or a similar thread, you were very wax lyrical about theatres shutting down? I want to go back to the theatre, albeit one that is Covid secure for the audience and performers. |
|
2,340 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jun 30, 2020 20:20:42 GMT
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but you werenât the only one, dawnstar. But I would have allowed Brtis back in to go home. Until it became obvious that it was gonna get very bad. Brexit or covid-19? |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Jun 30, 2020 20:28:02 GMT
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but you werenât the only one, dawnstar. But I would have allowed Brtis back in to go home. Until it became obvious that it was gonna get very bad. Even once it became obvious that it was going to get very bad, it would have been legally very difficult for a country to close its borders to its own returning citizens. It would, though, have been possible to impose a two-week quarantine on returning citizens. Some countries did this. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2020 21:18:56 GMT
Do I recall earlier in this thread or a similar thread, you were very wax lyrical about theatres shutting down? I don't understand what you mean by this sentence at all, nor what thread you are referring to. Please explain. |
|
