ITman88 wrote: » Most are ignoring this. It is exactly the elephant! Officials in the UK did a study last week on the effects of the restrictions and determined a shrink in the economy of 6% is the equilibrium where the economic contraction will cause more deaths. It’s forbidden however from being mentioned by many posters, you will be accused of immaturity/lack of empathy/not understanding the effects of the virus etc.
Dr. Bre wrote: » Where’s the end game here? Obviously a vaccine but do we return to the zoo after Easter and let nature take its course .
timmy_mallet wrote: » I wouldnt be going near a vaccine for 5 to 10 years at least, and I dont think I'd be in the minority. Would honestly take the first one to market?
storker wrote: » How many deaths were attributable to the last recession?
JoeA3 wrote: » Not everyone is living the same life in the same circumstances as you. It sounds like its easy street for you, but for many people it most definitely is not. Think of those for example living in very cramped apartments, those living with extended family, those with young children (especially if they are special needs) who don't understand why they can't get out, those who live alone and cannot visit their friends/family, those living under the threat of domestic abuse, etc, etc. For so many people, these restrictions are torture. And thats before we even get to the economy, what its going to do to so many businesses. Personally I really hope that they'll relax it back to how it was before last Friday. My optimism isn’t high though. Hand on heart, the impact these restrictions are having on me is causing me far more stress and worry than any perceived risk of catching the virus itself.
timmy_mallet wrote: » If it doesn't turn up in the hospital, people don't care. Ask a garda in a few years how they're doing when the rate of suicide is through the roof and they're spending their shifts dealing with it.
Dr. Bre wrote: » The problem is most will take it straight away because this has been so much on the news
jules5417 wrote: » When i get stressed I think about anne frank in an attic for 2 years with another family and knowing if she gets caught she will die. I also think of countries where if you dont work you dont eat like India. We need to look outwards and realise we are so lucky. We are getting financial help. I know it is stressful, also if somebody is suffering domestic abuse the law hasnt changed,you should still phone the guards.
Heres Johnny wrote: » I think pubs and clubs should be the last things to reopen. They will be packed when they reopen and when they finally do, they will all have to open together, can't phase that in because the ones that do open will be even busier.
Arghus wrote: » I posted this in the main thread earlier. I have to laugh at the naivete of people who say how can they impose stricter restrictions, as if this is as restricted as it gets. This is restrictive, unbelievably so. But it's nowhere near what it could be. You could be in for a shock in a week or two. I hope not, but who knows. There's plenty of people still out walking everywhere, there isn't really that visable of a presence of cops, you can go as often and as far as you like to the shops and plenty of factories and workplaces that aren't really essential have massaged that interpretation of the rules to stay open. Harsher would mean only bare bones essential services staying open - chemists, foodstores, perhaps some banks. All restaurants closing, even for takeaway, remaining places of work except for those in the medical industry being closed. No more 2km walks. Maybe even no more walks outside full stop. And limitations on numbers of visits to foodshop, with only one person per household allowed. And cops and the army really up in your face asking you all about your business. That's a full lock down. In a nutshell, don't expect things to be relaxed for a good while. In fact, expect more restrictions. Talk of just after Easter is fantasy stuff. April, forget it. I would be amazed if May isn't partially or totally out of the question as well. They need to get the rate of daily infections down to effectively zero and to keep it there for a period afterwards, just to be sure you have stopped the spread. You can't reopen things before then or else exactly the same rapid growth will happen again. It is so obvious. How people don't get that is amazing.
timmy_mallet wrote: » People do get it. They're capable of assessing risk.
Arghus wrote: » I work in a Supermarket. I can tell you for a fact that a lot of people are not.
GT89 wrote: » Tbh I am following the measures at the moment for the two week period but if it is extended then I will start to break the restrictions and breach the 2km radius. I think it will get to the point if they extend the measures for too long a period then people will just ignore especially now the weather is improving. I think it will get to the point where the measures will be so widly ignored by the vast majority it will be unenforceable.
timmy_mallet wrote: » Well, quite, some are thinking if countries like India, and that's why this focus on prioritising a small minority needs to be seriously reconsidered.
jules5417 wrote: » How old are you 5? Just do what we are been told to do and dont make this about just you. Restrictions lifted too soon loads more deaths but hey as long you are sorted its all good.
Logan Roy wrote: » 1. How are you going to enforce these restrictions? 2. What's the necessity of getting it down to 0 if infections can still arrive in from other countries? Will we close our borders both arrivals and departures indefinitely to avoid these "imported" cases?
jules5417 wrote: » So are you saying our elderly dont matter
kieran. wrote: » What further step up measures do you think will be imposed?
YFlyer wrote: » No casual walking, running or cycling. Have one shopping per week and one pharmacy visit per week.
timmy_mallet wrote: » How do you know?
