Relaxation of restrictions Part II

road_high

What Username Guidelines wrote: »

I think the problem with going to lockdown and then seeing sweden having similar successes without a lockdown, is dialling us back to non-lockdown with social distancing. Because people are frustrated with lockdown there is a pressure valve that will be released with easing restrictions. People who dont follow news/info as attentively will think it's over completely and go back to no social distancing and visiting friends and family.

The other part is educating the entire population of the ramifications of relaxing. If they say for example you can have social gatherings with 4 people, a lot of people will push that and meet 4 different people every day and be smug how they're "getting away with it" or even think that it cannot be policed, when in reality it needs to be self-policed. In Sweden it appears they understand the importance of social distancing and protecting others and so do it automatically. At least from what I've read.

Overall though, while getting some people back to work will help the economy and social welfare bill, opening retail in limited capacity will be difficult and revenue will be impacted heavily. People buying a few pots of paint wont fund the health service, so I think we need to stop thinking about getting back to where we were but instead have new ways of thinking like generating revenue for business in new ways - heavy move to online, delivery, contactless collection, etc.

Yes the bury our heads in the sand approach will do wonders for the economy. Why not just all sit at home online and it’ll run itself. Anyway who really needs €70 billion per year to run a country?

LiquidZeb

road_high wrote: »

For the hundredth time. Without business generating tax revenues- you don’t have the money to treat people.
Why is this such a struggle for some people to get?

I guess if you lived on the dole all your life you'd think money was magic too.

pjohnson

drunkmonkey wrote: »

There currently recruiting drone pilots and beachball counters.

So they are creating employment? Is that not good for the economy?


Or is this conspiracy/fantasy time?

road_high

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Be grand, we can borrow (basically) an unlimited amount of makey-uppey money

And how do we service the debt? We may borrow (for the moment, but that will change). It’s paying back the interest on top of what we owe already from current expenditure that is the issue. But sure there’s no issue so carry on

drunkmonkey

pjohnson wrote: »

So they are creating employment? Is that not good for the economy?


Or is this conspiracy/fantasy time?

Only offering 349 a week, doubt they'll get many takers, no critical thinking ability required so you never know.

joseywhales

road_high wrote: »

For the hundredth time. Without business generating tax revenues- you don’t have the money to treat people.
Why is this such a struggle for some people to get?

Unless tax revenues are going to increase by about 20 bn it will not be enough to cover any of these costs, we will borrow our way through this for sure.

If opening a business leads to more people in ICU then the "cost of business" is higher than any tax revenue they produce.

road_high

pjohnson wrote: »

So they are creating employment? Is that not good for the economy?


Or is this conspiracy/fantasy time?

I know you’re being facetious but Made up jobs based on pointless bureaucracy are a dead weight on an economy and stifle competitiveness.

What Username Guidelines

road_high wrote: »

Yes the bury our heads in the sand approach will do wonders for the economy. Why not just all sit at home online and it’ll run itself. Anyway who really needs €70 billion per year to run a country?

Not what I meant, I mean we can get things going again slowly, but everyone needs to realise that people will still get sick and some will die, to ensure people abide by social distancing. My issue is more around allowing some business to open and if people slip and avoid the rules, they'll roll back on opening more businesses as it will appear things are getting bad because we opened the businesses. If we can open slowly and people are smart, then we can open more and more hopefully, slowly chipping away at the welfare bill. Collective responsibility is very important while we relax restrictions.

LiquidZeb

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Be grand, we can borrow (basically) an unlimited amount of makey-uppey money

Yeah go down to the bank, borrow money and then claim that it's makey uppey money when it's time to cough it up. Now transplant that scenario on a national level. I really hope you're taking the piss here.

facehugger99

joseywhales wrote: »

If opening a business leads to more people in ICU then the "cost of business" is higher than any tax revenue they produce.

That's nonsensical.

How much tax do these businesses you are talking about contribute from corporation/PRSI/PAYE?

How many extra people have ended up in ICU and what is the cost of same?

Without any figures, your argument is just a dumb as the whole 'one single life is more important the the whole economy' nonsense that the mouth-breathers come out with.

GazzaL

dePeatrick wrote: »

Another three weeks of restrictions and we will have this virus well and truly contained. This could give us the gap we need to contain the virus and get in with life as normal as is possible.

Lifting restrictions now will mean having to enforce them again within six weeks.

The virus will be around a lot longer than another 3 weeks. We need to open up and manage the risk. Lots of businesses are working towards re-opening if they haven't already re-opened, and putting in place things like hand sanitiser stations.

JeffKenna

road_high wrote: »

And how do we service the debt? We may borrow (for the moment, but that will change). It’s paying back the interest on top of what we owe already from current expenditure that is the issue. But sure there’s no issue so carry on

Are our ten year bonds not now at negative interest rates?

road_high

JeffKenna wrote: »

Are our ten year bonds not now at negative interest rates?

Indeed, for how long?

facehugger99

JeffKenna wrote: »

Are our ten year bonds not now at negative interest rates?

So we can run the gas off the electricity and the electricity off the gas?

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

easypazz

I see on the RTE news feed that around the world the news is largely positive, deaths and new cases falling, businesses reopening.

The game is up for Cervicalcheck Holohan and his chums.

road_high

easypazz wrote: »

I see on the RTE news feed that around the world the news is largely positive, deaths and new cases falling, businesses reopening.

The game is up for Cervicalcheck Holohan and his chums.

Hope you’re right. They seem like dogs with a bone though, unwilling to let go or listen to more nuanced views.
Mustn’t be enough pressure on state finances (yet).

Stark

This article is good https://quillette.com/2020/04/23/covid-19-superspreader-events-in-28-countries-critical-patterns-and-lessons/

Few people are looking for a return to free-for-all but with a data-driven approach we can selectively target high-risk activities while minimising large scale economic and social fallout.

Tbh, all the anecdotal bull**** about "more people out and about" is just that. People outdoors doesn't matter that much in the grand scheme of things.

titan18

glasso wrote: »

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

That would seem fair enough to me. Think hardware stores should include likes of electrical hardware too, so Harvey Norman/Currys etc could reopen then too.

Tacitus Kilgore

easypazz wrote: »

I see on the RTE news feed that around the world the news is largely positive, deaths and new cases falling, businesses reopening.

The game is up for Cervicalcheck Holohan and his chums.

road_high wrote: »

Hope you’re right. They seem like dogs with a bone though, unwilling to let go or listen to more nuanced views.
Mustn’t be enough pressure on state finances (yet).

I know right, I mean the CMO must be delighted with the pandemic.. and having to make decisions in the moment on it, with the responsibility of same.

I'd say he's having the best few months of his life, no wonder so many absolute heroes like yourselves are lining up for the job.

richie_os

titan18 wrote: »

That would seem fair enough to me. Think hardware stores should include likes of electrical hardware too, so Harvey Norman/Currys etc could reopen then too.

An increase to 5km would be a slap in the face for a lot of people. I live alone, and I have adhered completely to the restrictions but haven't seen my partner, or any friends or family since early March. I will be driving beyond the 5km after the 5th of May, while continuing social distancing.

the kelt

glasso wrote: »

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

Who knows, that would be positive if the case although you would think there would be some reference to other business and trades etc.

Who knows?

drunkmonkey

glasso wrote: »

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

So the beaches and parks are open but you can only go 5km. Or is that just limited to exercise, like I can take a flagging to the park if it's over 5km but I must sit on my hole and not break a sweat.
I think that's fake to be honest from listening to one of the doctors on newstalk this morning. I also think the advisory committee meet on a Tuesday not Monday.

Ferris_Bueller

glasso wrote: »

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

If that was to be true I would find it difficult to take. A month seems excessive for what are such minor changes. I have been obedient of the restrictions so far but if they were to announce that ahead of May 5th I can say with certainty that I would end up breaking some of the restrictions.

titan18

richie_os wrote: »

An increase to 5km would be a slap in the face for a lot of people. I live alone, and I have adhered completely to the restrictions but haven't seen my partner, or any friends or family since early March. I will be driving beyond the 5km after the 5th of May, while continuing social distancing.

As plenty of people have said before the 2km, and then 5km is for exercise only. It refers to nothing else.

Below would seem to preclude you from visiting family/partner really, although no one is stopping anyone anyway.

dePeatrick

dePeatrick wrote: »

Another three weeks of restrictions and we will have this virus well and truly contained. This could give us the gap we need to contain the virus and get in with life as normal as is possible.

Lifting restrictions now will mean having to enforce them again within six weeks.

They said that 3 weeks ago too !!!

martingriff

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So the beaches and parks are open but you can only go 5km. Or is that just limited to exercise, like I can take a flagging to the park if it's over 5km but I must sit on my hole and not break a sweat.
I think that's fake to be honest from listening to one of the doctors on newstalk this morning. I also think the advisory committee meet on a Tuesday not Monday.

I might think it's fake but I suppose with the parks and benches could be for those returning to work and going for walks at lunch. I also dont see how they could limit distance if shops and parks can be open. I agree with the incremental, we can see how others are going which unlike others I see nothing wrong with it

easypazz

drunkmonkey wrote: »

So the beaches and parks are open but you can only go 5km. Or is that just limited to exercise, like I can take a flagging to the park if it's over 5km but I must sit on my hole and not break a sweat.
I think that's fake to be honest from listening to one of the doctors on newstalk this morning. I also think the advisory committee meet on a Tuesday not Monday.

100% fakenews.

Tenzor07

titan18 wrote: »

As plenty of people have said before the 2km, and then 5km is for exercise only. It refers to nothing else.
Below would seem to preclude you from visiting family/partner really, although no one is stopping anyone anyway.

Increasing the range to 5km won't happen, it's either 2k or no K, I mean is there an actual scientific rational behind this?

In the UK they say exercise once per day, doesn't say within 2km, is science different across the border?

alwald

glasso wrote: »

ok - supposed to have come from the civil service. take from it what you will. that's all I know.

but the changes are so incremental I'm not sure why someone would bother to fake it.

Very much says to me "We don't really know what to do next so 5km, waiting to see what the Germans do"

My understanding of increasing the travel limit to 5km and opening beaches/parks is to make sure that any potential spread of the virus is quickly localised and testing/contact tracing is done in a speedy manner.

1 month seems reasonable to assess any dangerous spike before moving to stage 2 of lifting restrictions.

I much prefer this approach than the Italian one as it's too rushed and more prone to failure.