Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Coronavirus

Options
1…4243454748…80

Comments

  • Options
    #1322
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    The Nal wrote: »
    This is what you're dealing with here.

    Originally Posted by leavingirl View Post
    "You sound like a right little gay bastard"

    Just a horrible, angry, scared and hateful person.

    LOL. where did they post that?


  • Options
    #1323
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    snoopboggybog wrote: »
    The corona Virus travelled entire world from Wuhan but it did not reach Beijing and Shanghai... can anybody put light?

    How come Russia & North Korea are totally free of Covid- 19? Because they are staunch ally of China. Not a single case reported from this 2 countries. On the other hand South Korea / United Kingdom / Italy / Spain and Asia are severely hit. How come Wuhan is suddenly free from the deadly virus?

    China will say that their drastic initial measures they took was very stern and Wuhan was locked down to contain the spread to other areas. I am sure they are using the Anti dode of the virus.

    Why Beijing was not hit? Why only Wuhan? Kind of interesting to ponder upon.. right? Well ..Wuhan is open for business now. America and all the above mentioned countries are devastated financially. Soon American economy will collapse as planned by China. China knows it CANNOT defeat America militarily as USA is at present

    I respect your theory, it is tangible. However I am convinced that theories that develop around blaming China are too crude and obvious. If China were hell bent on World domination it is unlikely that they would sacrifice thousands of their own citizens to enable this. Not because they care about them but because they do not need to. If they developed a virus I am sure they could have developed a more sinister version that wiped out a lot more people. Any Mandarin aspirations about land grabs would surely involve decimating their enemies. They could easily have released the virus into other countries with a lot more familiar relationships with the United States. Why didn't they also attack Russia while they are at it?

    No, way too blatant. The conspirators do not want to kill the planet, they only want to wipe a certain demographic, the European and American pension population.
    snoopboggybog wrote: »
    Nancy Pelosi was unable to bring down Trump thru impeachment. ....so work along with China to destroy Trump by releasing a virus. Wuhan,s epidemic was a showcase. At the peak of the virus epidemic. ..

    While Nancy might hate the Donald, I won't envisage her involvement in something as sinister. She is peoples democrat, through and through. It is not in her. Not her style.

    s-l300.jpg


  • Options
    #1324
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    leavingirl wrote: »
    Since COVID19 has been downgraded, there should be an appropriate response. But nothing has changed. Everywhere is still in lockdown.

    Wow.

    The current lockdown and reaction by countries isn't based solely on a technical classification

    It's based on the highly contagious nature of the disease, the currently accepted fatality rate, the incubation period, the amount of resources it takes to treat patients and dozens of other factors


  • Options
    #1325
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,553 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    LOL. where did they post that?

    Earlier in the thread, directed at me, someone deleted it but Cheerful quoted it so its still there.

    Top lolz bantz.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=112865002


  • Options
    #1326
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,141 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    leavingirl wrote: »
    Stop your gaslighting. I'm not agreeing with you.

    Since COVID19 has been downgraded, there should be an appropriate response. But nothing has changed. Everywhere is still in lockdown.


    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#definition-of-hcid

    Way to absolutely show a complete misunderstanding of the threat of this virus on our heath system.

    Well done you :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1327
    leavingirl
    Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭leavingirl


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    First, that is a UK decision. We are not the UK. the .ie in boards.ie is a clue.
    Second COVID19 still meets all of these criteria

    • acute infectious disease
    • may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
    • often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
    • ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
    • requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely
    Good enough reason to maintain the lockdown.

    That's a crazy conspiracy theory. The facts are that COVID19 DO NOT MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA SINCE MaRCH 19th

    Definition of HCID
    In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:

    - acute infectious disease
    - typically has a high case-fatality rate
    - may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
    - often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
    - ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
    - requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely

    It's a crazy conspiracy theory to suggest that the IRISH COVID19 strain does meet the above criteria and the UK strain DOES NOT :)

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#definition-of-hcid


  • Options
    #1328
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    leavingirl wrote: »
    That's a crazy conspiracy theory. The facts are that COVID19 DO NOT MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA SINCE MaRCH 19th

    Definition of HCID
    In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the following criteria:

    - acute infectious disease
    - typically has a high case-fatality rate
    - may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
    - often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
    - ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
    - requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely

    It's a crazy conspiracy theory to suggest that the IRISH COVID19 strain does meet the above criteria and the UK strain DOES NOT :)

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#definition-of-hcid

    you know what is crazy? repeating the same wall of text when it has been pointed out to you many times that you are incorrect.


  • Options
    #1329
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    leavingirl wrote: »
    That's a crazy conspiracy theory. The facts are that COVID19 DO NOT MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA SINCE MaRCH 19th

    The disease technically didn't meet those criteria before March 19th either.


  • Options
    #1330
    leavingirl
    Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭leavingirl


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The disease technically didn't meet those criteria before March 19th either.

    Where do you pluck that one out of? Citation needed. Otherwise it's just a conspiracy theory


  • Options
    #1331
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    leavingirl wrote: »
    Where do you pluck that one out of? Citation needed. Otherwise it's just a conspiracy theory

    Basic logic

    It never had a high fatality rate (like Ebola). It's likely they classified it as such for risk purposes because they didn't have a full picture on global fatality rate

    Which they do now. Hence the reclassification. It's not very complex.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1332
    leavingirl
    Registered Users Posts: 548 ✭✭✭leavingirl


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Basic logic

    It never had a high fatality rate (like Ebola). It's likely they classified it as such for risk purposes because they didn't have a full picture on global fatality rate

    Which they do now. Hence the reclassification. It's not very complex.

    That's your opinion.

    The facts are that as of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is NO LONGER considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.

    That means that BEFORE March 19th it was considered to be a high consequence infectious disease.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#definition-of-hcid


  • Options
    #1333
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    leavingirl wrote: »

    The facts are that as of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is NO LONGER considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.

    That means that BEFORE March 19th it was considered to be a high consequence infectious disease.

    You keep repeating the above, but it's clear you don't understand it's context or meaning

    Ignorance of something is not an argument against it.

    The lockdown in the UK, like in other countries, is based on the fact that the disease is highly contagious and spreads easily (among other factors), that hasn't changed

    The only thing that has changed is a technical classification that as we can see was likely wrong before (now that we have a full picture of Covid 19's fatality rate)


  • Options
    #1334
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    You keep repeating the above, but it's clear you don't understand it's context or meaning

    Ignorance of something is not an argument against it.

    The lockdown in the UK, like in other countries, is based on the fact that the disease is highly contagious and spreads easily (among other factors), that hasn't changed

    The only thing that has changed is a technical classification that as we can see was likely wrong before (now that we have a full picture of Covid 19's fatality rate)

    Probably more correct that the previous classification was based on incomplete/inaccurate data. Given the data they had the classification was correct.


  • Options
    #1335
    Mic 1972
    Registered Users Posts: 3,213 ✭✭✭Mic 1972


    leavingirl wrote: »
    That's your opinion.

    The facts are that as of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is NO LONGER considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.

    That means that BEFORE March 19th it was considered to be a high consequence infectious disease.

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid#definition-of-hcid

    Why do we care about how UK classified Covid19?
    Here in Europe and the rest of the world it's still considered a highlight infectuous virus and rightly so


  • Options
    #1336
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Why do we care about how UK classified Covid19?
    Here in Europe and the rest of the world it's still considered a highlight infectuous virus and rightly so

    Indeed. It's still classified as a highly infectious disease in the UK.


  • Options
    #1337
    Clarence Boddiker
    Registered Users Posts: 776 ✭✭✭Clarence Boddiker


    Hmmmmm

    Screen-Shot-2020-03-26-at-11-32-00.png


  • Options
    #1338
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    Mic 1972 wrote: »
    Why do we care about how UK classified Covid19?
    Here in Europe and the rest of the world it's still considered a highlight infectuous virus and rightly so

    It was only a matter of time before the virus became political.

    Every pandering journalist has now become an expert.

    George Lee springs to mind, 10 years ago he was the layman's finance expert, 7 weeks ago he was the tree huggers climate change messiah.... role forward 5 weeks and he now the resident Covid expert in Donnybrook.

    George Lee is multitasking and multitalented. What a guy.


  • Options
    #1339
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Clarence Boddiker wrote: »
    Hmmmmm

    Screen-Shot-2020-03-26-at-11-32-00.png
    The clumsy (discounted Gold) seller has been at this for ages, back at the 2008 recession, he called for a "new world order" (this sounds better with a shouty German accent).

    It would likely start with an economic 'North Atlantic Union' (NAFTA & EU+Brexitland), the timing really depends on how soon China will overtake (both these combined) areas for GDP, 2060 is the current estimate.

    rtGnzcC.png


  • Options
    #1340
    eleventh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 436 ✭✭eleventh


    IAMAMORON wrote:
    The conspirators do not want to kill the planet, they only want to wipe a certain demographic, the European and American pension population.
    I wouldn't say so. That's the age bracket more likely to die, doesn't mean they're being targetted specifically.
    I think they're targetting everyone in one way or another.


  • Options
    #1341
    Dr. Bre
    Registered Users Posts: 7,571 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    Lol the Brits don’t want a global government- just look at brexit !


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1342
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,799 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    eleventh wrote: »
    I wouldn't say so. That's the age bracket more likely to die, doesn't mean they're being targetted specifically.
    I think they're targetting everyone in one way or another.

    Who?

    Why?


  • Options
    #1343
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Dr. Bre wrote: »
    Lol the Brits don’t want a global government- just look at brexit !
    That was a choice made by a (silent majority), the people.

    A view not shared, or even wanted (le referendum gamble) by the government of the time.

    Indeed Gordy 'sell the gold' Brown, T.Blair and the prince of darkness himself (Mandlethingy) came out of the shadows
    - All to slate the very concept of any exitious and their great love for all things Euroland.


  • Options
    #1344
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    eleventh wrote: »
    I wouldn't say so. That's the age bracket more likely to die, doesn't mean they're being targetted specifically.
    I think they're targetting everyone in one way or another.

    The pension funds don't want to kill off persons who can be contributing to the schemes. This is counterproductive. They are only interested in reducing the number of members who are costing the schemes billions annually via their pension.


  • Options
    #1345
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    IAMAMORON wrote: »
    The pension funds don't want to kill off persons who can be contributing to the schemes. This is counterproductive. They are only interested in reducing the number of members who are costing the schemes billions annually via their pension.

    can you explain how a plan that will crash the world stock mark and the global economy is of benefit to pension companies who depend on those very things to maintain their profitability?


  • Options
    #1346
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,438 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    leavingirl wrote: »
    Still enough to close down the country. Still enough for everyone to lose their jobs..

    Not everyone has lost their jobs lol


  • Options
    #1347
    Clarence Boddiker
    Registered Users Posts: 776 ✭✭✭Clarence Boddiker


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Not everyone has lost their jobs lol

    I'm alright Jack...


  • Options
    #1348
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    can you explain how a plan that will crash the world stock mark and the global economy is of benefit to pension companies who depend on those very things to maintain their profitability?

    I will keep it simple. Here is a dumbed down version.

    The owners of the pension funds supplying pensions to the US and Europe decide that the funds are no longer profitable. They decide to stop incurring further losses to develop a virus to eradicate 33-40% of people over the age of 70.

    These same stakeholders then liquidate their stock holdings ( prior to the crash) and reinvest in Gold. Gold prices always rise during stock market crashes, it is dry land for investors who are drowning. Gold prices have risen by over 60% since the markets started crashing.

    Once the virus panic is over they can then liquidate their interest in Gold and reinvest in commodities, which as it happens have also dramatically decreased in value. It is essentially a " landgrab" for their commodities.

    The 2 trillion agreed by the senate yesterday will shore up any short term liquidity issues within the funds. Pension funds are essentially macro Ponzi Schemes. They can only survive if people are contributing to them. Once net contributions are a deficit they become sinking ships, metaphorically of course. In reality they are too big to sink, hence the state involvement.

    Pensioners in their mid 70's are receiving inflation proof index linked payments based on premiums they were paying in the 60's, 70's and 80's. It is dead money for funds which were only elasticated, actuarially assessed and balanced to make payments for an average of 10 years.


  • Options
    #1349
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    IAMAMORON wrote: »
    I will keep it simple. Here is a dumbed down version.

    The owners of the pension funds supplying pensions to the US and Europe decide that the funds are no longer profitable. They decide to stop incurring further losses to develop a virus to eradicate 33-40% of people over the age of 70.

    These same stakeholders then liquidate their stock holdings ( prior to the crash) and reinvest in Gold. Gold prices always rise during stock market crashes, it is dry land for investors who are drowning. Gold prices have risen by over 60% since the markets started crashing.

    Once the virus panic is over they can then liquidate their interest in Gold and reinvest in commodities, which as it happens have also dramatically decreased in value. It is essentially a " landgrab" for their commodities.

    The 2 trillion agreed by the senate yesterday will shore up any short term liquidity issues within the funds. Pension funds are essentially macro Ponzi Schemes. They can only survive if people are contributing to them. Once net contributions are a deficit they become sinking ships, metaphorically of course. In reality they are too big to sink, hence the state involvement.

    Pensioners in their mid 70's are receiving inflation proof index linked payments based on premiums they were paying in the 60's, 70's and 80's. It is dead money for funds which were only elasticated, actuarially assessed and balanced to make payments for an average of 10 years.

    so exactly how many trillion dollars of gold have been bought by these pension companies recently? given that the total value of all the gold on world markets is, give or take a few billion, $3.5T. and how have these massive tradeoffs not been noticed?


  • Options
    #1350
    IAMAMORON
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,078 ✭✭✭IAMAMORON


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    so exactly how many trillion dollars of gold have been bought by these pension companies recently? given that the total value of all the gold on world markets is, give or take a few billion, $3.5T. and how have these massive tradeoffs not been noticed?

    It is accounting really. You need to understand the concept of company values.

    A pension fund is valued based on its exposure to future pension liabilities. It will have a value completely different to its liquidity levels. Insurance companies are similar, they are valued based on their susceptibility to future claims.

    These differ for example to a bank or a trading company whose market values ( MV ) are based on their profits and capability of creating future profits.

    A stakeholder in a pension company is exposed to a different type of financial risk than a stakeholder in a trading company. Please bear in mind that you can be both.

    A pension company does not profit from the level of funds it receives or in fact from the level of funds it pays out. It makes profits on the administration of the fund. The big money in pension funds is in the speculation of its' future liabilities and how robustly financed the fund is to meet them.

    The Net Market Value ( NMV ) of a pension fund will be dramatically different to its actual pension liability. They are different things.

    Do you know what a "margin call" is?

    See link for Gold prices and history thereof.

    https://goldprice.org/gold-price-history.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1351
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    IAMAMORON wrote: »
    It is accounting really. You need to understand the concept of company values.

    A pension fund is valued based on its exposure to future pension liabilities. It will have a value completely different to its liquidity levels. Insurance companies are similar, they are valued based on their susceptibility to future claims.

    These differ for example to a bank or a trading company whose market values ( MV ) are based on their profits and capability of creating future profits.

    A stakeholder in a pension company is exposed to a different type of financial risk than a stakeholder in a trading company. Please bear in mind that you can be both.

    A pension company does not profit from the level of funds it receives or in fact from the level of funds it pays out. It makes profits on the administration of the fund. The big money in pension funds is in the speculation of its' future liabilities and how robustly financed the fund is to meet them.

    The Net Market Value ( NMV ) of a pension fund will be dramatically different to its actual pension liability. They are different things.

    Do you know what a "margin call" is?

    See link for Gold prices and history thereof.

    https://goldprice.org/gold-price-history.html

    thanks, i know how pension companies work. You didnt answer the question i asked. You said
    These same stakeholders then liquidate their stock holdings ( prior to the crash) and reinvest in Gold.

    I asked how that is possible given the size of the market for gold. I even gave you a figure for this. how is possible that major pension companies could liquidate their entire stock holding and nobody noticed?


Advertisement