People who want "Foreva Lockdown"

Quantum Erasure

growleaves wrote: »

Well look lads the media and the government have strongly hinted that social distancing will be permanent .

Forever ever?

Gods Gift

George lee doesn’t sound to upbeat tonight.

growleaves

KaneToad wrote: »

"Normal" human contact means different things to different people. Your definition of normal human contact might not bring enjoyment to me..

Sorry but you're only dodging the real issue. Even if you really intend to keep 2m distance from all other human beings for the rest of your life, that is not some subjective preference it is extremely atypical and usually the preserve of monks, sufferers from agoraphobia etc.

growleaves

biko wrote: »

There won't be permanent restrictions, nor will anyone accept them.

Sure, even now in the midst of the actual pandemic all we have protests all over the shop. Not to mention people that say it's all a hoax.
Do you think people that act like this during the worst of it will accept restrictions long term?

At first I would have said no, and did say no. Now I am pessimistic about the restrictions being spun out a very long time. Permanent yes

Jucifer

alentejo wrote: »

I want Dublin city to return to some level of normality. The WFH has had serious consequences for our capital city

What might seem negative in the short term could provide positive change in the medium and long term for the city. I don’t want to be forced into the city because it suits other people or to financially support businesses near the office when I can operate at least as efficiently WFH. People prefer working in different ways and we should facilitate all to the maximum extent possible,

Richard Hillman

I enjoyed lockdown. The pace of life suddenly slowed, the streets were quiet, I had nowhere to be and no pressure in life.

However, the crisis is now over. The virus has weakened. It is time to get back to normal.

There are a cohort that seem to want to go back to Lockdown II. They won't say "We want lockdown" but they'll insist on the pubs being closed, they'll panic every day at 5.45pm, if anybody even alludes to any sort of theory that the figures were overblown they will lose the plot. Don't ever question the use of face asks, even though we were originally told they will do little and there is growing evidence from other countries that they make no difference. If they see any videos of people drinking or congregated, they will lose their ****. SECOND WAVE, arrrghhhh.

There are some people who have completely lost it. They are still in siege mode.

Fann Linn

khalessi wrote: »

I read the thread and not sure what sector you are referring to, would you like to clarify?[/quote


I'd say theyre on about nurses etc.

Quantum Erasure

Richard Hillman wrote: »

There are some people who have completely lost it. They are still in siege mode.

like this guy?

growleaves wrote: »

At first I would have said no, and did say no. Now I am pessimistic about the restrictions being spun out a very long time. Permanent yes

Melanchthon

paw patrol wrote: »

But there is a large cohort out there that think the lockdown/restrictions wasn't/is enough and demand more measures. They are the people I think the OP is talking about.
.

People can be both of these things at the same time.
E.g want a very hard lock down that's strictly enforced for a fairly short amount of time then opening up life properly within the country with effective quarentine for arrivals.
Followed when there is a flair up by occasional very strict local lockdowns.

Look how east Asia handled the crisis, instead here we have this halfway house that's gutting the economy while still having quiet a lot of restrictions for months and months at a time.

growleaves

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

like this guy?

Charming.

Why don't you take the growleaves challenge and state for the record that you personally won't be socially distancing permanently.

Dr. Bre

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Also a load from a certain sector working from home on full pay.

Not doing a lot of work.

Suits a lot of people.

Stop trying to turn this into private v public sector . This thread was about people in lockdown forever

Graham

growleaves wrote: »

Even if you really intend to keep 2m distance from all other human beings for the rest of your life

You keep pretending this pandemic is going to be permanent.

Why?

Xtrail14

Gods Gift wrote: »

George lee doesn’t sound to upbeat tonight.

Dublin is rotten in the disease.

growleaves

Graham wrote: »

You keep pretending this pandemic is going to be permanent.

Why?

Er I'm not pretending anything. The restrictions were sold as very short-term a few months ago and then turned into years-long restrictions, with 2022 being given as an end date by some. What's to stop them being spun out to 2024, then 2026 etc., etc.? Genuine question

Graham

growleaves wrote: »

What's to stop them being spun out to 2024, then 2026 etc., etc.? Genuine question

You said permanent.

Which is it?

growleaves

Graham wrote: »

You said permanent.

Which is it?

By 'etc., etc.' I mean continual extensions, meaning permanent. Badly expressed on my part.

KaneToad

Richard Hillman wrote: »

However, the crisis is now over. The virus has weakened. It is time to get back to normal.

Is this true? Have they proven that its weakened?

Graham

growleaves wrote: »

By 'etc., etc.' I mean continual extensions, meaning permanent. Badly expressed on my part.

What are you basing this permanent pandemic prediction on?

Do you have particular virological expertise or are we straight into conspiracy theory territory?

growleaves

Graham wrote: »

What are you basing this permanent pandemic prediction on?

What's your particular virological expertise?

Lol

biko

Richard Hillman wrote: »

However, the crisis is now over. The virus has weakened. It is time to get back to normal.

When the Spanish flu first appeared in early March 1918, it had all the hallmarks of a seasonal flu, albeit a highly contagious and virulent strain.

From September through November of 1918, the death rate from the Spanish flu skyrocketed. In the United States alone, 195,000 Americans died from the Spanish flu in just the month of October.

And considering Dublin numbers are now up again since May - maybe maybe it isn't time just yet to get back to normal.

Graham

growleaves wrote: »

Lol

my thoughts precisely. :pac:

Arghus

growleaves wrote: »

By 'etc., etc.' I mean continual extensions, meaning permanent. Badly expressed on my part.

Right from the word go it was made clear that social distancing and so would be with us for the foreseeable - even if lock downs and more outwardly punitive measures were relaxed in time. It was always part of the health authorities message. I can remember them saying, repeatedly, that social distancing is "here to stay" during press briefings in March. Here to stay means for the next 6 or even up to 18 months in my book, or until something fundamentally changes about the situation. That may seem like a long time, but it isn't actually forever.

It's not their fault if people misread or misinterpreted the situation.

Graham

Arghus wrote: »

It's not their fault if people misread or misinterpreted the situation.

or chose to deliberately misrepresent the situation.

[Deleted User]

Arghus wrote: »

Right from the word go it was made clear that social distancing and so would be with us for the foreseeable - even if lock downs and more outwardly punitive measures were relaxed in time. It was always part of the health authorities message. I can remember them saying, repeatedly, that social distancing is "here to stay" during press briefings in March. Here to stay means for the next 6 or even up to 18 months in my book, or until something fundamentally changes about the situation. That may seem like a long time, but it isn't actually forever.

It's not their fault if people misread or misinterpreted the situation.

But if Covid is still around in 5 years, which is quite likely, would you still accept restrictions?

Graham

jacdaniel2014 wrote: »

if Covid is still around in 5 years, which is quite likely

source?

Arghus

jacdaniel2014 wrote: »

But if Covid is still around in 5 years, which is quite likely, would you still accept restrictions?

Why is it quite likely that Covid will be around in five years?

Risteard81

Antisocial distancing is unacceptable. These restrictions are without merit and people should really ask what the agenda is. It's a nonsense to suggest that we can prevent disease. We're not God.

Dr. Bre

jacdaniel2014 wrote: »

But if Covid is still around in 5 years, which is quite likely, would you still accept restrictions?

A vaccine is supposedly gonna take 12-18 months. If no vaccine the vulnerable and elderly will have to be very cautious. Restrictions can’t last forever

Arghus

Graham wrote: »

or chose to deliberately misrepresent the situation.

Oh, I'm sure people wouldn't deliberately do that...

Graham

Risteard81 wrote: »

It's a nonsense to suggest that we can prevent disease. We're not God.

We appear to be doing quite well eradicating

Smallpox
Polio
Measles
Rubella
Polio
Syphilis
Rabies

That whole medical science thing you may not have heard of.