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
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I'm not sure what else they can take from us?

 

We just sit in our houses anyway. There's nothing left to do or take from us.

 

Make essential shops one person only. If you're a single parent then you'll need to get a friend or family member to go for you.

 

I'm expecting to see a reduction in the next 2 weeks now the holidays are over. People will have seen the christmas break as a chance to go and see a few mates or family. I think now we're in Jan and normality is resumed for the majority of working people that we'll start to see a reduction. Mainly as people don't want to do anything in January but wallow anyway :D

 

 

This. We are in lockdown anyway right now ? I would be extremely surprised if they shut the country down like last time ? 

 

idiots have been meeting up and breaking rules over Christmas and New Year so hopefully we will see a slight fall in figures soon. 

 

if they keep increasing, they will put the whole country in tier 4. Maybe close schools 

 

They need to be more strict on fines for people breaking rules, we are far too soft. Anyone else noticing quite often there is no queue to get into big supermarkets anymore? Let's start with sorting this out before moving onto anything more drastic. A country wide lockdown with manufacturing/construction stopping will be catastrophic and i hope this never happens. 

Edited by JonnyBoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

The point he was responding too was how we could have done a New Zealand here, close borders completely. He asked how you stopped the illegal immigrants coming over on dingys and that they would pose a risk to this strategy. I don’t see what is wrong with what he said.

I don’t think it’s possible to completely do it, (not without taking barbaric drastic action anyway) and that’s kind of the point.

That’s not how I seen it, he was arguing that it would be impossible to do a New Zealand type lockdown and border shutdown here and even if we did we would still be at risk and highlighted why. If we had have done it and a illegal immigrant on a boat came in carrying the virus, it would damage that plan would it not?

What do you do to prevent it? Sink them, put floating spikes all around the island? Or accept it probably isn’t possible and it’s damage limitations? 

 

 


Alternatively, we could rescue them and take them to a secure quaratine area.


Of course, that wouldn't sit well with the govt's voter base, so it would never have been considered.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 

Make essential shops one person only.

This really ought to be the rule anyway unless you have really exceptional circumstances. Swear I spend most of my weekly shop dodging dense pensioners walking two abreast down the aisles without a care in the world or families of six letting their kids run riot. Makes me wonder why I bother the way some people carry on when they're out.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I'm not sure what else they can take from us?

 

We just sit in our houses anyway. There's nothing left to do or take from us.

 

Make essential shops one person only. If you're a single parent then you'll need to get a friend or family member to go for you.

 

I'm expecting to see a reduction in the next 2 weeks now the holidays are over. People will have seen the christmas break as a chance to go and see a few mates or family. I think now we're in Jan and normality is resumed for the majority of working people that we'll start to see a reduction. Mainly as people don't want to do anything in January but wallow anyway :D

 

It’s pointless increasing the restrictions, they need to actually enforce the current restrictions. But selfish cvnts always know best don’t they.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Nod.E said:

Subjective, isn't it?

 

We've already seen quantitative easing and you'd expect to see more of that moving forwards. (The banks announced they were printing £150bn in Nov.)

 

It's in everyone's interest, particularly the banks of course, for the economy to keep moving. So they'll keep on making it easier for the government to borrow without increasing interest rates, I imagine.

 

The inevitable result is inflation in the long run. Savers will have to be punished so as to encourage spending, because credit isn't going to be as easy to come by. How are the hundreds of thousands of people that have lost their jobs or are already up to their limit in credit going to borrow off the back of this? Short answer is they won't be able to. It's a long road back for those people, which starts with life returning to normal.

 

But top level it feels fine, if you have assets. If you're on the ladder already. And if you've not already lost your job. And it's kids in school now that I worry about, too.

 

From a personal standpoint, I've always felt in life that I got by just in time, i.e. one of the last years before £9k uni fees, being just young enough to benefit from studying with the aid of the world wide web while also coming into my career and finding a niche just as it was growing etc. 

 

But now, even more so. If I was 18 today I'd feel utterly hopeless. If I was in school now I'd be stressing the fvck out about my exam situation let alone anything else. And if I was only a few years younger I'd be worried about the rates I'd have to pay for a first mortgage, if I could get one at all. I feel fortunate.

 

This is what I mean about subjectivity. The economy, for me, looks fine. It plays to my circumstances. I hate sanctimony and I'd hate for people to think I was guilty of it, so I'll try to keep this bit short, but I wish more people could see beyond their own circumstances. I've whined in this thread about lockdowns slowing down business for me, but ultimately I'm fine and I'll be fine. This whole thing will truly bugger so many people, which is devastating.

 

Ultimately the economy will survive, but a lot of people will suffer from this. The gap between the haves and have nots will widen further, but then middle England seems to like the idea of that to the point they vote for it. Go figure.

Of course it’s subjective, not every single person in the UK is going to be worse off as a result of anything but generally the economy is in a bad way and would be worse if furlough was to end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, martyn said:

Point has already been made, but it's hospitalisations that are important.

 

If you vaccinate all over 75's then open up fully, it wouldn't be too long before hospitals fill up again due to sheer numbers getting infected, unless the seasonal weather effects can temper it a bit.

But like I say surely the deaths and hospitalisations scale with each other in each age group? Surely the older and more vulnerable are more likely to be admitted to hospital than the under 50s. If anything I would wager the most vulnerable categories are over represented in the hospitalisation numbers, it's a shame they're not easily accessible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Costock_Fox said:

Of course it’s subjective, not every single person in the UK is going to be worse off as a result of anything but generally the economy is in a bad way and would be worse if furlough was to end.

Oh, I know.

 

In a roundabout way I was just saying that while it isn't a conspiracy, given an opportunity, the powers that be will use disruptive change to their advantage. No doubt about it in my eyes.

 

Saying the economy is going to be 'bad' glosses over how it will benefit some.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

Also Matt Hancock saying he’s really worried about the South Africa variant and we are still yet to attempt to control the borders. The last 5 years of politics has been a repetition of ‘take back control’ and we haven’t even tried to control our borders from a health perspective during a pandemic.

 

 

The Conservative party putting up a border to trade (including one within the UK) but not implementing even the most basic checks on airport arrivals is slightly surreal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

This really ought to be the rule anyway unless you have really exceptional circumstances. Swear I spend most of my weekly shop dodging dense pensioners walking two abreast down the aisles without a care in the world or families of six letting their kids run riot. Makes me wonder why I bother the way some people carry on when they're out.

My sister lives in Dubai and when they had their lockdown they were only permitted one designated person to go out and do their shop. It was really strict and anyone caught with out a permit was fined or prosecuted. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I'm not sure what else they can take from us?

 

We just sit in our houses anyway. There's nothing left to do or take from us.

 

Make essential shops one person only. If you're a single parent then you'll need to get a friend or family member to go for you.

 

I'm expecting to see a reduction in the next 2 weeks now the holidays are over. People will have seen the christmas break as a chance to go and see a few mates or family. I think now we're in Jan and normality is resumed for the majority of working people that we'll start to see a reduction. Mainly as people don't want to do anything in January but wallow anyway :D

 

Well they could impose a nighttime curfew .

They could close down all non essential business.  for eg why on earth are house sale and viewings still going ahead.

They could restrict the amount of excercise to half an hour a day outside and to within 1 mile of your house.

They could close all schools

Could stop all retail except supermarkets doing click and collect

Impose a similar scheme to France where you had to make an application to travel so essentally banning all non essential travel.

Close places of worship

Stop household bubbles for a period of time.

 

etc etc

Not saying they should do any of these or will but there is still a good list of things they could change.

 

Things will get tighter as the numbers are out of control even allowing for some day to day distortion over the festive period.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Steve_Walsh5 said:

My sister lives in Dubai and when they had their lockdown they were only permitted one designated person to go out and do their shop. It was really strict and anyone caught with out a permit was fined or prosecuted. 

Just seems a common sense move to me. I'm really struggling to think of any circumstance where more than one person needs to be out shopping aside from childcare issues?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, reynard said:

Well they could impose a nighttime curfew .

They could close down all non essential business.  for eg why on earth are house sale and viewings still going ahead.

They could restrict the amount of excercise to half an hour a day outside and to within 1 mile of your house.

They could close all schools

Could stop all retail except supermarkets doing click and collect

Impose a similar scheme to France where you had to make an application to travel so essentally banning all non essential travel.

Close places of worship

Stop household bubbles for a period of time.

 

etc etc

Not saying they should do any of these or will but there is still a good list of things they could change.

 

Things will get tighter as the numbers are out of control even allowing for some day to day distortion over the festive period.

 

Fair play, absolutely none of them affect me, so that's probably why non of them came to mind :D

 

One thing is, if they force a business to close, nobody should lose a business or a job. We should pay them to do their bit and sort out this brutal bill afterwards. The end is very near now. If they make that clear and tell people we need one massive effort to help then I'm sure the people will listen.

 

They've got to get the message right, which I very much doubt they'd manage with any degree of success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Just seems a common sense move to me. I'm really struggling to think of any circumstance where more than one person needs to be out shopping aside from childcare issues?

That's the only one I can think of. The amount of people that are looking after kids alone and have nobody to contact who could do a basic shopping run for them must be miniscule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, filbertway said:

That's the only one I can think of. The amount of people that are looking after kids alone and have nobody to contact who could do a basic shopping run for them must be miniscule.

In terms of groceries; could do online shopping also. I appreciate; not ideal for all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

Just seems a common sense move to me. I'm really struggling to think of any circumstance where more than one person needs to be out shopping aside from childcare issues?

Have you thought of it from a pensioner's point of view?  When the only reason you can leave the house is to go shopping, then shopping becomes an attractive outing.  For some pensioners - not all - they idea of going out and risking coronavirus is more attractive than the idea of stopping in and losing their mind to dementia.

 

Losing your social life is a but of a beggar for someone who goes to work and meets people there, or for that matter who meets people on line.  If your social life is all you have, then losing it is more than a bit of a beggar.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

But like I say surely the deaths and hospitalisations scale with each other in each age group? Surely the older and more vulnerable are more likely to be admitted to hospital than the under 50s. If anything I would wager the most vulnerable categories are over represented in the hospitalisation numbers, it's a shame they're not easily accessible.

Yes would be good to see the data on positive cases requiring hospitalisation per age group as then you could model it, i had a quick scan but couldn't find anything.

 

Over 75's will account for the bulk of hospitalisations, but the percentage of under 75's still requiring hospitalisation may still be high enough to overwhelm hospitals, if you let this more virulent strain run riot.

 

Might be that you'd need to vaccinate more age groups before you could be confident about really opening up.

Edited by martyn
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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