Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
BrokenRecord

BrokenRecord

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
21 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Greater Manchester gets a £22m support package from the same government offering £60m a few hours ago.

 

Call out Burnham for playing politics all you like but it's a fvcking disgrace that the government is effectively punishing the people in that area for his tactics. Either £60m is necessary to support people in Greater Manchester or it isn't as far as the Treasury is concerned. It can't be both?

No point even bothering. So many people from Leicester point the finger and laugh at Liverpool and Manchester, as if just by being from the midlands they're not just as screwed as the North-West is. Fact is we should all stand together against the absolutely appalling treatment by London, both Northwest and Midlands, but can't expect anything from the same bellends making the same tired jokes about Liverpool they've been making since the seventies. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, whoareyaaa said:

hold tight we are about to go into Oblivion with another national lockdown coming soon.

 

today NHS England > 

Tested positive for COVID-19 at time of death - 134

 

So these people could be dying of other causes but we are putting it down to Covid, is this right?

This has been exhaustively covered and addressed on this thread, along with the rationale behind lockdown, the science behind face masks in addition to the clinical trial period associated with the introduction of a vaccine. 

 

You'll find 5G mostly on the conspiracy theory thread. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Lionator

Lionator

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Anybody who blames Burnham for this is an Ostrich. He would’ve accepted pretty much any lockdown measure if the government could financially protect businesses who wouldn’t be able to operate. The government were not willing to oblige, so he refused on the basis that the effects of the economic damage would massively outweigh short term health damage. He was then expecting the minimum £60m offered. Boris, Sunak and Cummings have spitefully withdrawn all funding to the bare minimum of £22m (for the whole of Greater Manchester) because he wasn’t playing by their rules. He dared to stand up for his people. And now pubs, cafe’s, places of leisure are left penniless. It’s nothing short of a disgrace. 

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The People's Hero

The People's Hero

Posted
Posted

Said it before and will say it again; these lockdowns coupled with the end of furlough coming up will spell the end for many, many businesses and many, many jobs.

 

It won't all happen 1/11 and it might not even happen by end of 2020; but for all those saying 2020 has been a terrible year, you just wait for 2021.

 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nod.E

Nod.E

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Said it before and will say it again; these lockdowns coupled with the end of furlough coming up will spell the end for many, many businesses and many, many jobs.

 

It won't all happen 1/11 and it might not even happen by end of 2020; but for all those saying 2020 has been a terrible year, you just wait for 2021.

 

Best to be on the safe side though, eh? 🙃

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SecretPro

SecretPro

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, String fellow said:

Andy Burnham is pleading poverty for Manchester, because he wanted £65M whilst the government offered £60M. Perhaps he needs reminding that one of his city's football clubs paid LCFC £80M for one defender! He's also moaning that Tier 2 restrictions haven't reduced the increase in COVID-19 cases. That alone should be a good enough reason for moving to Tier 3.

Strange notion perhaps but I always assumed it would be the job of the government to offer financial help/recompense during a pandemic rather than a football club? If we go in to tier 3 then I'll guess I'll be down the KP to ensure that they get their hands in their pockets and do the Governments job for them. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SemperEadem

SemperEadem

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, BrokenRecord said:

No point even bothering. So many people from Leicester point the finger and laugh at Liverpool and Manchester, as if just by being from the midlands they're not just as screwed as the North-West is. Fact is we should all stand together against the absolutely appalling treatment by London, both Northwest and Midlands, but can't expect anything from the same bellends making the same tired jokes about Liverpool they've been making since the seventies. 

Bang on

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
Posted

Manchester getting absolutely shafted there because the current crop in charge are stubborn w@nkers. 

Disappointing to see. As said above, how can £60m be offered and then £22m is the next step? What kind of punishment is that for the citizens of Manchester?

 

I'd love for someone also to ask at PMQs or someone from the media, plainly and bluntly, why some areas have been put in Tier 2/3 lockdowns but those areas with higher cases/rates per 100k population have not, and making a point that those specific areas are led by Tory ministers...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
SecretPro

SecretPro

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
10 minutes ago, String fellow said:

The £60M is still on the table. Why should Manchester get more money than elsewhere? Burnham is playing politics with his constituents lives, but he only seems to care about local businesses. Btw, I'm not a 'fecking idiot'.

Well given they have double the population of Liverpool and a business density far higher, its pretty clear why some areas should get more than others. It could never be a one size fits all approach, that would be nonsensical.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
StanSP

StanSP

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
Quote

On the inability to agree a support package, Mr Johnson said: "I do regret this. As I said last week, we would have a better chance of defeating the virus if we work together."

Funny that. Whenever there's constructive criticism or alternative ideas offered up, they're batted down as 'political posturing'. Maybe if the government could lend a little bit of an ear sometimes and not always be so headstrong in going where the money lies or hand contracts to their mates then things could be a bit more productive?

 

Just a thought.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FoxesDeb

FoxesDeb

Posted
Posted

Good to see people are consistently only hearing or reading what they want to hear, as usual. Lots of outrage at the £22m, have people not read the full story? The £60m is still available, presumably it involves a bit more discussion given the greedy cvnt went in for £90m but was suddenly willing to take £65m. Big difference there...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

How about stopping the 14.5 billion quid we give for foreign aid, including the 71 million we send to China and using that money for support in the U.K.. charity starts at home.

Because “foreign aid” is often nothing more than a backhander to win a contract of some sort. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nod.E

Nod.E

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Good to see people are consistently only hearing or reading what they want to hear, as usual. Lots of outrage at the £22m, have people not read the full story? The £60m is still available, presumably it involves a bit more discussion given the greedy cvnt went in for £90m but was suddenly willing to take £65m. Big difference there...

For context, the national bloody lottery distributes £600m per year. £22m is nothing.

 

Context isn't fashionable, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...