4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 8, 2020 11:37:55 GMT
One important thing - young people are not to blame. They have been told they are not at risk, they have seen pubs open, schools open with few safety measures. How are we supposed to expect safe behaviour if the places they are, are (at least in the case of schools, though universities we have yet to see) given laxer guidelines? Have they actually been told they weren't at risk? Young people are certainly at lower risk of dying, but it wasn't long after the disease first hit Britain that we saw the first death of a young person with no previously existing health complications so it's not exactly news to anyone that everyone has at least some risk. And you don't need to have studied biology at university to understand the idea of diseases being transmitted from person to person. There are no excuses. I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government in an attempt to excuse members of the public behaving selfishly and irresponsibly. The message all along has been: keep your distance, wash your hands, sanitise things, and for the last couple of months wear masks. Even in the case of pubs it's been about maintaining distance, with table service only and no standing at the bar. Absolutely nothing anywhere has even hinted that's it's OK to go to a rave or crowd shoulder to shoulder in a bar or pile on to a small beach. If people adopt an attitude of "There's little risk to me so I'll do what I like" that's entirely on them. This isn't about people being confused. This about people not giving a fā. People need to think for themselves because that's the only way we can have a nuanced approach that permits partial opening. The government can't individually inspect every single venue and set policy on a case by case basis. Government can only set global policies, and if the government is going to clamp down it needs to do it everywhere. And that means a second lockdown, because if people won't make the responsible choice themselves the government has to take the choice away from them. We can't have it both ways.
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 8, 2020 11:44:51 GMT
One important thing - young people are not to blame. They have been told they are not at risk, they have seen pubs open, schools open with few safety measures. How are we supposed to expect safe behaviour if the places they are, are (at least in the case of schools, though universities we have yet to see) given laxer guidelines? Have they actually been told they weren't at risk? Young people are certainly at lower risk of dying, but it wasn't long after the disease first hit Britain that we saw the first death of a young person with no previously existing health complications so it's not exactly news to anyone that everyone has at least some risk. And you don't need to have studied biology at university to understand the idea of diseases being transmitted from person to person. There are no excuses. I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government in an attempt to excuse members of the public behaving selfishly and irresponsibly. The message all along has been: keep your distance, wash your hands, sanitise things, and for the last couple of months wear masks. Even in the case of pubs it's been about maintaining distance, with table service only and no standing at the bar. Absolutely nothing anywhere has even hinted that's it's OK to go to a rave or crowd shoulder to shoulder in a bar or pile on to a small beach. If people adopt an attitude of "There's little risk to me so I'll do what I like" that's entirely on them. This isn't about people being confused. This about people not giving a fā. People need to think for themselves because that's the only way we can have a nuanced approach that permits partial opening. The government can't individually inspect every single venue and set policy on a case by case basis. Government can only set global policies, and if the government is going to clamp down it needs to do it everywhere. And that means a second lockdown, because if people won't make the responsible choice themselves the government has to take the choice away from them. We can't have it both ways. In many ways I wish the Government would implement a second lockdown. It was absolutely the wishy washy 'do this is you possibly maybe could but no worries if not, go to work but don't' messaging that got the country into deeper trouble. A concentrated strict lockdown was needed from the start. Getting the economy going doesn't mean a damn if numbers keep rising. I do honestly think that, eventually, we're heading for Universal Basic Income. The stop-start of opening and closing isn't viable for businesses and with Covid being such a fluid situation it is really the only fair way, especially to those who haven't been able to work since March and won't be able to for a long time to come.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Sept 8, 2020 12:35:26 GMT
Saying that no masks should be worn in schools was one massive government indication that teens are safe. Many other countries have done the opposite, this was a deliberate message being sent. Twenty-somethings less of an excuse bur, even then, the message has been that you will not have a serious version of the disease. The panicked ādonāt kill Grannyā rhetoric we now see wouldnāt be necessary if that message had been conveyed more calmly by policy and actions to police that policy earlier.
The problem flows from government. They have abdicated responsibility so that they can blame others instead.
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Sept 8, 2020 12:53:33 GMT
Have they actually been told they weren't at risk? Young people are certainly at lower risk of dying, but it wasn't long after the disease first hit Britain that we saw the first death of a young person with no previously existing health complications so it's not exactly news to anyone that everyone has at least some risk. And you don't need to have studied biology at university to understand the idea of diseases being transmitted from person to person. There are no excuses. I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government in an attempt to excuse members of the public behaving selfishly and irresponsibly. The message all along has been: keep your distance, wash your hands, sanitise things, and for the last couple of months wear masks. Even in the case of pubs it's been about maintaining distance, with table service only and no standing at the bar. Absolutely nothing anywhere has even hinted that's it's OK to go to a rave or crowd shoulder to shoulder in a bar or pile on to a small beach. If people adopt an attitude of "There's little risk to me so I'll do what I like" that's entirely on them. This isn't about people being confused. This about people not giving a fā. People need to think for themselves because that's the only way we can have a nuanced approach that permits partial opening. The government can't individually inspect every single venue and set policy on a case by case basis. Government can only set global policies, and if the government is going to clamp down it needs to do it everywhere. And that means a second lockdown, because if people won't make the responsible choice themselves the government has to take the choice away from them. We can't have it both ways. In many ways I wish the Government would implement a second lockdown. It was absolutely the wishy washy 'do this is you possibly maybe could but no worries if not, go to work but don't' messaging that got the country into deeper trouble. A concentrated strict lockdown was needed from the start. Getting the economy going doesn't mean a damn if numbers keep rising. I do honestly think that, eventually, we're heading for Universal Basic Income. The stop-start of opening and closing isn't viable for businesses and with Covid being such a fluid situation it is really the only fair way, especially to those who haven't been able to work since March and won't be able to for a long time to come. There have been months to restructure things like education but the āback to normalā attitude has left us high and dry. To a certain extent, businesses continuing WFH will allow for transition to a permanent different way of working but the infrastructure plans donāt seem to have any real work being done on them. Weāre supposed to be a nation of innovators but we are going to be left way behind if it is not allowed to flourish. Take education, there has been nothing of note done on creating a proper national online learning platform. Using current staffing there could easily have been a drive to get all schools up and running, to have staff training online during holidays, to source and distribute ways of accessing it. Now that we have also seen how using schools as frontline social services is fraught with danger, where is the bolstering of outside school agencies to support at risk and disadvantaged children properly? So, āback to schoolā is spiralling within a few days, schools split apart and unable to deliver both live and online education, no alternative plan ready to go, further division of the advantaged/disadvantaged. We have wasted the summer months in a misplaced belief that we were going to be able to return to what was before, Add in examination disasters and we are in a terrible place. We have failed children. Oh, and UBI. Yes, looks absolutely necessary now.
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Sept 8, 2020 14:33:06 GMT
One important thing - young people are not to blame. They have been told they are not at risk, they have seen pubs open, schools open with few safety measures. How are we supposed to expect safe behaviour if the places they are, are (at least in the case of schools, though universities we have yet to see) given laxer guidelines? I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government We know, you say it in every single post...
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 8, 2020 15:02:13 GMT
One important thing - young people are not to blame. They have been told they are not at risk, they have seen pubs open, schools open with few safety measures. How are we supposed to expect safe behaviour if the places they are, are (at least in the case of schools, though universities we have yet to see) given laxer guidelines? I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government I'm getting thoroughly sick of the Government blaming the people.
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 8, 2020 15:12:11 GMT
I'm getting thoroughly sick of people blaming the government We know, you say it in every single post... Perhaps I wouldn't need to keep saying it if other people didn't keep expecting the government to do all their thinking for them. It's not clever or insightful to keep blaming the government. It's the lazy, mindless option. People rush to the beaches on a sunny day? Blame the government. People refuse to weak masks? Blame the government. Illegal parties? Blame the government. Can't go on holiday? Blame the government. Can't go out? Blame the government. Can go out? Blame the government. Restrictions imposed slowly? Government should have acted faster. Restrictions imposed quickly? Government should have given more warning. I have no idea what the government is going to do over the next few months but I know exactly what some of you are going to say about it, which makes for an excellent drinking game but terrible discussion. But hey, if people want to live in a little bubble of self-congratulatory smugness where everyone around them is utterly incompetent, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Sept 8, 2020 15:32:44 GMT
We know, you say it in every single post... but I know exactly what some of you are going to say about it And we know exactly what you're going to say about it...
|
|
1,845 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Sept 8, 2020 15:34:51 GMT
The government is incompetent but that does not mean we have to be.
There is enough information on what we need to do to restrict transmission and be relatively safe - Keep your distance - Wear a face mask when indoors or interacting closely with strangers - Wash your hands regularly - Avoid busy places - .......
The duty of care lies with the individual not the state, we all need to interact with strangers every day from both a social and economic perspective and this can be done relatively safely as long as we respect each other and make the effort.
Effort is the weakness as we all know we should exercise regularly but very few of us do as it is tough and being COVID aware at all times is tough but it is what we need to do.
Expecting to live your life by government dictat is abdicating responsibility and even more so with this government of imbeciles.
|
|
2,206 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Sept 8, 2020 16:02:37 GMT
The government is incompetent but that does not mean we have to be. There is enough information on what we need to do to restrict transmission and be relatively safe - Keep your distance - Wear a face mask when indoors or interacting closely with strangers - Wash your hands regularly - Avoid busy places - ....... The duty of care lies with the individual not the state, we all need to interact with strangers every day from both a social and economic perspective and this can be done relatively safely as long as we respect each other and make the effort. Effort is the weakness as we all know we should exercise regularly but very few of us do as it is tough and being COVID aware at all times is tough but it is what we need to do. Expecting to live your life by government dictat is abdicating responsibility and even more so with this government of imbeciles. With the rest of the post, does it matter if the government are imbeciles?
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Sept 8, 2020 16:42:08 GMT
The government is incompetent but that does not mean we have to be. There is enough information on what we need to do to restrict transmission and be relatively safe - Keep your distance - Wear a face mask when indoors or interacting closely with strangers - Wash your hands regularly - Avoid busy places - ....... The duty of care lies with the individual not the state, we all need to interact with strangers every day from both a social and economic perspective and this can be done relatively safely as long as we respect each other and make the effort. Effort is the weakness as we all know we should exercise regularly but very few of us do as it is tough and being COVID aware at all times is tough but it is what we need to do. Expecting to live your life by government dictat is abdicating responsibility and even more so with this government of imbeciles. Many people are selfish but there is no compulsion to not be so (not diktat, rules) so they do what the hell they feel like doing. Not too bad for the young and healthy but the imposition on older and more at risk people is disproportionate. What is a state for if not to protect its people?
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 8, 2020 17:08:00 GMT
Many people are selfish but there is no compulsion to not be so (not diktat, rules) so they do what the hell they feel like doing. Not too bad for the young and healthy but the imposition on older and more at risk people is disproportionate. What is a state for if not to protect its people? What is freedom for if not to be used responsibly? I really don't understand how people here can act as though nobody should be expected to take any responsibility for the effect of their own actions. Everyone knows how disease spreads. Everyone knows that over 41,500 people have died of this. We've had half a year of constant news stories drumming into us the importance of continuing to protect ourselves. We've had local lockdowns to show that the problem has not gone away. And we have people who know all of that and still refuse to do the right thing, and we have people who claim that it's not those people's fault that they're deliberately doing the wrong thing. What's so difficult about doing the right thing simply because it's the right thing? What sort of vile person thinks it's OK to intentionally harm others because nobody is forcing them not to? How can anyone defend that?
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 8, 2020 17:18:28 GMT
Many people are selfish but there is no compulsion to not be so (not diktat, rules) so they do what the hell they feel like doing. Not too bad for the young and healthy but the imposition on older and more at risk people is disproportionate. What is a state for if not to protect its people? What is freedom for if not to be used responsibly? I really don't understand how people here can act as though nobody should be expected to take any responsibility for the effect of their own actions. Everyone knows how disease spreads. Everyone knows that over 41,500 people have died of this. We've had half a year of constant news stories drumming into us the importance of continuing to protect ourselves. We've had local lockdowns to show that the problem has not gone away. And we have people who know all of that and still refuse to do the right thing, and we have people who claim that it's not those people's fault that they're deliberately doing the wrong thing. What's so difficult about doing the right thing simply because it's the right thing?Ā What sort of vile person thinks it's OK to intentionally harm others because nobody is forcing them not to? How can anyone defend that? It is possible for the terrible situation we are in to be the fault of the Government AND a minority of selfish folk
|
|
2,706 posts
|
Post by Cardinal Pirelli on Sept 8, 2020 17:39:36 GMT
Many people are selfish but there is no compulsion to not be so (not diktat, rules) so they do what the hell they feel like doing. Not too bad for the young and healthy but the imposition on older and more at risk people is disproportionate. What is a state for if not to protect its people? What is freedom for if not to be used responsibly? I really don't understand how people here can act as though nobody should be expected to take any responsibility for the effect of their own actions. Everyone knows how disease spreads. Everyone knows that over 41,500 people have died of this. We've had half a year of constant news stories drumming into us the importance of continuing to protect ourselves. We've had local lockdowns to show that the problem has not gone away. And we have people who know all of that and still refuse to do the right thing, and we have people who claim that it's not those people's fault that they're deliberately doing the wrong thing. What's so difficult about doing the right thing simply because it's the right thing? What sort of vile person thinks it's OK to intentionally harm others because nobody is forcing them not to? How can anyone defend that? It goes much further than right/wrong thing. To take one current example. If you are a 17 year old Hancock just pointed out that your reckless behaviour is putting older people in danger. So cool it. At the same time they are told that they can gather in large groups, without masks, without effective social distancing, creating a dangerous environment for each other and adults around them, a number who are the age of their grandparents, in the magical space that they have designated a school building. Soon, university students will be able to do exactly the same plus added long hauls across country. There is no right thing/wrong, just a big conflicting thing.
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 8, 2020 17:57:09 GMT
What is freedom for if not to be used responsibly? I really don't understand how people here can act as though nobody should be expected to take any responsibility for the effect of their own actions. Everyone knows how disease spreads. Everyone knows that over 41,500 people have died of this. We've had half a year of constant news stories drumming into us the importance of continuing to protect ourselves. We've had local lockdowns to show that the problem has not gone away. And we have people who know all of that and still refuse to do the right thing, and we have people who claim that it's not those people's fault that they're deliberately doing the wrong thing. What's so difficult about doing the right thing simply because it's the right thing? What sort of vile person thinks it's OK to intentionally harm others because nobody is forcing them not to? How can anyone defend that? It is possible for the terrible situation we are in to be the fault of the Government AND a minority of selfish folk Absolutely. I've never claimed otherwise. I've never been a fan of Boris Johnson (except when he was on Have I Got News For You; it's all been downhill since then). I think he's probably one of the worst PMs of my lifetime. But the fact that he's a power-hungry bastard who didn't care how much he harmed the country in his quest for leadership is precisely why it's so important for everyone else to accept responsibility for their actions and stop saying that we can't expect people to do what's right unless the government makes them. I remember a discussion I had on rec.arts.theatre.musicals back in the late 1990s with a reasonably religious American woman who maintained that ultimately all morality came from God and that in a sense even atheists were implicit believers because it was only fear of judgment by an all-seeing God that kept anyone from a life of thievery, rape and murder. That struck me as a weird way of seeing things, because it suggests that she thought all people, including herself by implication, were essentially utterly evil at heart and were only kept on the straight and narrow by the constant threat of being held to account for their wrongdoing. I completely rejected that way of thinking then and I completely reject it now. I'm not religious; it's not the threat of punishment by God that governs my behaviour, nor is it the threat of punishment by Man. It's that I know how much it hurts to be on the receiving end of wrongdoing and I can't bring myself to inflict that same suffering on others. It's basic decency. I've always thought this was how almost everyone saw the world, but given the number of people here who are rushing to defend the coronavirus-irresponsible I'm starting to doubt my faith in human nature. It's up to each and every one of us to do the right thing. If someone decides to do the wrong thing that's on them, not on someone else for failing to provide enough of a threat to stop them.
|
|
3,926 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Sept 8, 2020 19:52:49 GMT
Soon, university students will be able to do exactly the same plus added long hauls across country. Suddenly living only a few miles away from one of the top universities in the country is looking like a really bad thing. So far Cambridgeshire has had fairly low rates (apart from Peterborough but that's the other end of the county) but I'm dreading what the coronavirus case numbers might be by the middle of October.
|
|
1,093 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Sept 8, 2020 21:35:06 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres?
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 8, 2020 22:21:18 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres? As I understand it, the new rules are no gatherings of more than six unless you go to the pub, are in a classroom, or anywhere with card machine.
|
|
4,588 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Sept 9, 2020 13:26:53 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres? Well no S Club 7 for a start
|
|
|
Post by intoanewlife on Sept 9, 2020 13:44:11 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres? Well no S Club 7 for a start PMSL
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Sept 9, 2020 14:45:22 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres? Well no S Club 7 for a start Except that there would be because they would be working and gathering for work purposes are permitted!
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 9, 2020 14:59:41 GMT
Except that there would be because they would be working and gathering for work purposes are permitted! Back before I was permanently working from home I remember some very tedious meetings where two or three people would spend half an hour discussing the details of something of zero interest to everyone else present. I dearly wish that back then gathering for work purposes had not been permitted. Online meetings have their difficulties, but one of the great advantages is that nobody can see you using binoculars to watch the sparrows. I don't miss meetings.
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Sept 9, 2020 16:37:33 GMT
So as I understand after the briefing, you can spend hours on public transport and the office coming into contact with dozens of strangers all day. But if seven of you then go for a drink you'll be fined.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Sept 9, 2020 16:58:21 GMT
So as I understand after the briefing, you can spend hours on public transport and the office coming into contact with dozens of strangers all day. But if seven of you then go for a drink you'll be fined. But on transport you will be wearing a mask (unless you are properly exempt or an idiot) and in offices you will be socially distanced. That is the difference. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about why it is socialising which has been restricted.
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Sept 9, 2020 17:18:46 GMT
So as I understand after the briefing, you can spend hours on public transport and the office coming into contact with dozens of strangers all day. But if seven of you then go for a drink you'll be fined. Yes, because only a limited amount of risk can be accepted so the risk needs to have the maximum benefit. Being able to get to work is important to the economy. Being able to have a party with your mates isn't.
|
|
1,093 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Sept 9, 2020 21:13:17 GMT
So how will the new āgroups of no more than 6 peopleā law affect theatres? Well no S Club 7 for a start I was about to comment, āTragedy!ā then realised I apparently canāt tell the difference between Steps and S Club. š¤·
|
|
2,262 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by theatreian on Sept 9, 2020 22:31:33 GMT
I am a little fed up of all the families of more than six being shown where it is an apparent tragedy that they wont all be able to meet up with anyone else. They could always split up and meet someone or is that too complicated to work out?
|
|
5,582 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 9, 2020 23:21:47 GMT
So as I understand after the briefing, you can spend hours on public transport and the office coming into contact with dozens of strangers all day. But if seven of you then go for a drink you'll be fined. Yes, because only a limited amount of risk can be accepted so the risk needs to have the maximum benefit. Being able to get to work is important to the economy. Being able to have a party with your mates isn't. But you can organise your mates into cohorts of 6 and go the same pub and yell across the 2 metres but you canāt meet the six other members of your family with whom you have been meeting and the only people you have been meeting since lockdown ended, within your own garden or home ? Iām frankly getting a bit sick of this Alice in Wonderland nation where drinking in a pub has become the sacred duty of the nation but seeing your kids is going to cause the end of the world.
|
|
5,582 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 9, 2020 23:24:55 GMT
So as I understand after the briefing, you can spend hours on public transport and the office coming into contact with dozens of strangers all day. But if seven of you then go for a drink you'll be fined. But on transport you will be wearing a mask (unless you are properly exempt or an idiot) and in offices you will be socially distanced. That is the difference. I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about why it is socialising which has been restricted. From my observations and I admit I am not going about that much, socialising isnāt restricted. People are crowding our drinking venues to the extent of blocking the pavements. I do not consider seeing my children as socialising quite in that way.
|
|
577 posts
|
Post by christya on Sept 10, 2020 12:15:33 GMT
From the posts I'm seeing on Facebook and Twitter, most people aren't planning on paying this any attention, but it's rebellion of the 'I'll see my kids if I want to' kind and not the 'you gotta fight for your right to party'. So maybe it'll work.
|
|