Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

nofools

SusieBlue wrote: »

Realistically when the money runs out or public buy in completely plummets, we are going to end up going Sweden’s way regardless. We can’t afford another 9 months of this, and the social burden of these lockdowns will be too big to bear by then. They are already hard to bear now, let alone what way this country will be by September 2021.
The question is do we want to continue to decimate the economy and destroy many lives and futures, or just accept that we cannot continue like this and make an honest attempt at actually living with this virus.
I know which one I’d prefer, and it’s the one that doesn’t sacrifice the many for the sake of the few.

Sweden have done a U turn. Their policy doesn't work.

acequion

nofools wrote: »

Sweden have done a U turn. Their policy doesn't work.

Back up that point please!

xhomelezz

SusieBlue wrote: »

Realistically when the money runs out or public buy in completely plummets, we are going to end up going Sweden’s way regardless. We can’t afford another 9 months of this, and the social burden of these lockdowns will be too big to bear by then. They are already hard to bear now, let alone what way this country will be by September 2021.
The question is do we want to continue to decimate the economy and destroy many lives and futures, or just accept that we cannot continue like this and make an honest attempt at actually living with this virus.
I know which one I’d prefer, and it’s the one that doesn’t sacrifice the many for the sake of the few.

Any chance to explain Sweden's way please ? Would be great by now to hear how they sorted it.

Thierry12

nofools wrote: »

Sweden have done a U turn. Their policy doesn't work.

They had a good run

Nice summer and autumn, enjoyed themselves.

We had none of that and still in the most idiotic lockdown with borders, airports, schools all open

I have great admiration for Sweden and New Zealand

One went erradifcation, one went who cares.

We still havent picked a side

We elected clowns and got a circus

nofools

acequion wrote: »

Back up that point please!

Go read the news

Idbatterim

SusieBlue wrote: »

Realistically when the money runs out or public buy in completely plummets, we are going to end up going Sweden’s way regardless. We can’t afford another 9 months of this, and the social burden of these lockdowns will be too big to bear by then. They are already hard to bear now, let alone what way this country will be by September 2021.
The question is do we want to continue to decimate the economy and destroy many lives and futures, or just accept that we cannot continue like this and make an honest attempt at actually living with this virus.
I know which one I’d prefer, and it’s the one that doesn’t sacrifice the many for the sake of the few.

half of me wants a quick vaccine to be finished with this ****, the other half really wants non for another 18-24 months, so it can show up the absolute idiocy and corwardice of the path they chose, which was the only path they were every going to choose, rosary beads out and borrow jaw dropping figures. Isnt it funny boys and girls, there was no extra money for anything before this, mental health, housing for workers, no money to reduce scandaolous marginal rate of tax, build more prison spaces BUT , BUT covid appears ! and chaching $$$$ earning a hundred euro a week and made redundanct, here is E350!!!

The pay out should be based on what you paid in and reflect it, not this banana republic system, earned a thousand a week, here is E350, earned 100 a week, here is E350 :rolleyes:

Idbatterim

Jim_Hodge wrote: »

You really would benefit from seeing first-hand what "only 37" in ICU means on the ground. You haven't a clue.
Thankfully we haven't more in ICU and that is because of the restrictions.

Can you even contemplate the long term cost and affect on our society and economy if we let this virus just rip through?

we dont need to let it rip through, the vulnerable in nursing homes etc should be properly protected and the elderly etc, limit interaction as much as possible...

xhomelezz

Thierry12 wrote: »

They had a good run

Nice summer and autumn, enjoyed themselves.

We had none of that and still in the most idiotic lockdown with borders, airports, schools all open

I have great admiration for Sweden and New Zealand

One went erradifcation, one went who cares.

We still havent picked a side

We elected clowns and got a circus

I can agree to some point with you, well with the most of it. Elected clowns have way too much to deal with at the moment. Healthcare and education is the biggest burden at the moment, underfunded and a bit of joke imo. None of these two problems can be sorted in short term, doesn't matter how much money government will throw at them.

Idbatterim

Mr. Karate wrote: »

I think everybody sees an extension coming. They'll find some excuse to keep us locked down over Christmas and New Year's.

no I doubt it, they are stupid here, but not that stupid, do that and they would alienate some of the stupid enough to buy what they are currently selling. It will be back to level 3, so from a social perspective in pubs and resteraunts, if 1.5 hours, no wet pubs, a waste of time. If wet pubs with early close and enforced 1.5 hours, a waste of time...

Literally made the decision weeks ago, to bypass the **** version of pubs that will be offered to us anyway, save the money and use it for proper fun things, travel, going out, when this is over. Absolute waste of money and time as it is, in my opinion...

Idbatterim

The Grinch Who Stole Christmas Takes Up New Role At NPHET



https://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2020/11/06/the-grinch-who-stole-christmas-takes-up-new-role-at-nphet/

xhomelezz

Idbatterim wrote: »

we dont need to let it rip through, the vulnerable in nursing homes etc should be properly protected and the elderly etc, limit interaction as much as possible...

Lol how you do that, I believe we didn't manage to do that till now. Any ideas how to?

nofools

Idbatterim wrote: »

half of me wants a quick vaccine to be finished with this ****, the other half really wants non for another 18-24 months, so it can show up the absolute idiocy and corwardice of the path they chose, which was the only path they were every going to choose, rosary beads out and borrow jaw dropping figures. Isnt it funny boys and girls, there was no extra money for anything before this, mental health, housing for workers, no money to reduce scandaolous marginal rate of tax, build more prison spaces BUT , BUT covid appears ! and chaching $$$$ earning a hundred euro a week and made redundanct, here is E350!!!

The pay out should be based on what you paid in and reflect it, not this banana republic system, earned a thousand a week, here is E350, earned 100 a week, here is E350 :rolleyes:

Hypothetically, at what level of death would you take it seriously?

acequion

nofools wrote: »

Go read the news

You can't even back it up, can you? You're actually funny.:pac:

nofools

Idbatterim wrote: »

no I doubt it, they are stupid here, but not that stupid, do that and they would alienate some of the stupid enough to buy what they are currently selling. It will be back to level 3, so from a social perspective in pubs and resteraunts, if 1.5 hours, no wet pubs, a waste of time. If wet pubs with early close and enforced 1.5 hours, a waste of time...

Literally made the decision weeks ago, to bypass the **** version of pubs that will be offered to us anyway, save the money and use it for proper fun things, travel, going out, when this is over. Absolute waste of money and time as it is, in my opinion...

Good decision

nofools

acequion wrote: »

You can't even back it up, can you? You're actually funny.:pac:

Of course i can, but I'm not into spoon feeding and you have already been rude to me.

Do your own homework, my intention here is to show others how wrong you are

Most regulars here about beyond hope and will never be convinced out of their own personal version of the truth.

nofools

Idbatterim wrote: »

we dont need to let it rip through, the vulnerable in nursing homes etc should be properly protected and the elderly etc, limit interaction as much as possible...

F*ck the elderly, let us drink pints

That's the summary to what you have been saying for months. Entitled to your opinion I suppose.

The great thing about Covid is that we don’t need to bother having budgets or recessions anymore.

We can just print lots of free money and let countries borrow lots of it and throw it around at every issue.

Sure we can pay it back over 30 years and it’s low interest right now ... what could go wrong?

Birdie Num Num

acequion wrote: »

A brilliant post as always Susie and I'm really sorry to hear about all you've gone through. But you're wasting your time justifying your reality and the reality of thousands like you to people like that because they simply don't care. They have little humanity, empathy or even basic respect for others and that comes across very starkly in the way they post. While ironically they claim to care about saving people from Covid. They care about restrictions and the power trip of forcing people to obey them. And belittling and rubbishing people who dare to complain.

And sadly this country is literally riddled with such people and unfortunately many occupy positions of power. Another poster commented that you couldn't be in a worse country in a crisis like this and I fully agree. I plan to get the hell out of Ireland when I retire but unfortunately have a bit to go before I can do that so I really am very worried.

Maybe we should we be changing the thread name to ‘Relaxation of Drama‘ at this stage.

nofools

nofools wrote: »

F*ck the elderly, let us drink pints

That's the summary to what you have been saying for months. Entitled to your opinion I suppose.

He literally didn’t say that at all though did he?

He specifically said protect the elderly.

nofools

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The great thing about Covid is that we don’t need to bother having budgets or recessions anymore.

We can just print lots of free money and let countries borrow lots of it and throw it around at every issue.

Sure we can pay it back over 30 years and it’s low interest right now ... what could go wrong?

And we don't even need truth or reason

Just a happy make believe world

Amazing right?

nofools

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He literally didn’t say that at all though did he?

He specifically said protect the elderly.

If you look closer he said to limit their movements, the exact thing you lot have a massive self involved problem with.

You can't treat others how you would hate to be treated.

nofools

nofools wrote: »

If you look closer he said to limit their movements, the exact thing you lot have a massive self involved problem with.

You can't treat others how you would hate to be treated.

We are already asking the whole population to severely limit their movements.

So there would be no change for them if we specifically asked them to restrict movements while we go back to work.

And it benefits them as their pensions are less likely to get cut and health care spending is less likely to get cut.

And vaccines are around the corner. The elderly will get them first.

So we can all lockdown or we could ask the people likely to get very sick.

nofools

[Deleted User] wrote: »

We are already asking the whole population to severely limit their movements.

So there would be no change for them if we specifically asked them to restrict movements while we go back to work.

And it benefits them as their pensions are less likely to get cut and health care spending is less likely to get cut.

And vaccines are around the corner. The elderly will get them first.

So we can all lockdown or we could ask the people likely to get very sick.

If it is ok for them it is ok for you

Oh...and you even said it benefits them.

Saint Jac

nofools

nofools wrote: »

If it is ok for them it is ok for you

Oh...and you even said it benefits them.

Saint Jac

You didn’t get the point once again... and that’s ok. I can tell you are struggling to really grasp this.

Zebra3

nofools wrote: »

Hypothetically, at what level of death would you take it seriously?

At what low level of deaths would you want all restrictions to be removed?

nofools

Zebra3 wrote: »

At what low level of deaths would you want all restrictions to be removed?

All restrictions?

1 new case or less daily per million with track and trace going strong plus full testing around travel

nofools

nofools wrote: »

All restrictions?

1 new case or less daily per million with track and trace going strong plus full testing around travel

Lol!!!

You realise even a vaccine is not going to achieve that?

So you want restrictions until we are literally out of money and can’t afford to have them anymore?

manniot2

nofools wrote: »

Slightly preferable to huge deaths and broken families

A premature death of the primary earner in a family is a loss of earning capacity worse than any redundancy.

You are blind to making your own worst fears play out worse than they should in the longrun.

how many premature deaths of primary earners have occured in this country since march?

nofools

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Lol!!!

You realise even a vaccine is not going to achieve that?

So you want restrictions until we are literally out of money and can’t afford to have them anymore?

You don't know how to use the word literally

It all started with just one case. Mind blowing but true

Zebra3

nofools wrote: »

All restrictions?

1 new case or less daily per million with track and trace going strong plus full testing around travel

Did you call for this when the flu was killing people?

Or was virtue signaling not a trendy thing back then?