road_high wrote: » Just moved to homes I'd wager. Domestic violence must be through the roof. Desperate for any woman/family trapped by this. Alcohol is the ultimate non essnetial item. Yet we can't buy a tin of paint?
Allinall wrote: » Does not compute.
road_high wrote: » Wouldn't bother me in the slightest if alcohol was restricted. Might be a good thing for our medical services. But more likely lead to anarchy from that class.
Padre_Pio wrote: » Computes perfectly well. People are already annoyed. Why put unnecessary restrictions on them to top it all off?
Deleted User wrote: » I honestly don't think you care about the mental health impact. We'd also face a severe mental health if large proportions of the population were to start dropping dead as a result of not taking the measures we have. I'm technically higher risk due to a chronic illness btw, I'm 28 but sure I'm expendable. Also work for an Irish company that expects no business for months regardless of if everyone went back to work in the morning. It's a global hit, every country is taking similar measures.
Allinall wrote: » If they go spare and start breaking restrictions, then they are not responsible drinkers.
housemouse wrote: » If you think it makes sense to spend €22 billion on this project, then you haven't considered the alternatives.
housemouse wrote: » The lockdown policy is driven by fear and panic. Medical experts are not economists.
Dodge wrote: » See what you’ve done there is suggest that economists should be the ultimate decider in any policy decision And that won’t and can’t ever happen. Because economists rarely think about people and often get figures quite wrong. Mostly because they guess/project based off their own biases of course Medicine is a hard science. Economics isn’t. And policy can’t be decided solely by either
housemouse wrote: » Investing any amount up to €22 billion in ICU care and other measures to deal with the virus would be cheaper to the Irish government than the policy of lockdown, and would be far better for all private citizens and private business. GDP is expected to fall by 8% this year, thanks to lockdown - this has real-life consequences.
donaghs wrote: » We also need to plan for the future. Is it wrong to consider that we could destroy our future because of a particular approach taken to save lives in the present? Not just "the economy", but the basic society we have now.
donaghs wrote: » We also need to plan for the future. Is it wrong to consider that we could destroy our future because of a particular approach taken to save lives in the present? Not just "the economy", but the basic society we have now. Basic standards of living and current life expectancy. Look at Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, except far more global.
housemouse wrote: » The lockdown policy is driven by fear and panic. Medical experts are not economists. They are tasked with fixing one problem: the spread of disease. They don't know how (because it's not their job, and it's difficult) to do a proper cost-benefit analysis. The policy of lockdown means the death of our economies. A temporary death, yes. But with long-term consequences that reduce the wealth, happiness and life expectancy of everybody. A cost-benefit analysis would try to understand what were the full costs of the policy, and see if there are alternatives that are better value, i.e. the opportunity cost. For example, the Central Bank has predicted that the cost to the Irish government of the current lockdown policy will be €22 billion. I'm going to ignore the absolutely huge cost to everybody else and focus only on this €22 billion cost to government. The supply of ICU care isn't cheap and the supply of nurses and doctors is not very elastic. But for the cost of ten overpriced children's hospitals, don't tell me there was no alternative. The lockdown is already going to cost an entire annual healthcare budget in lost taxes and income supports. More, if it is extended. Investing any amount up to €22 billion in ICU care and other measures to deal with the virus would be cheaper to the Irish government than the policy of lockdown, and would be far better for all private citizens and private business. GDP is expected to fall by 8% this year, thanks to lockdown - this has real-life consequences. A proper cost-benefit analysis would also include the remaining life expectancy of those who are vulnerable to Covid-19, after taking into account their other underlying health conditions. The media doesn't bother distinguishing between those dying with the virus, versus those who die of the virus. Health budgets should be focused on extending survival for those who can have a high quality of life (see the recent article by Dr. Malcolm Kendrick on his website for more). The total number of deaths in Western countries has not increased by any noticeable amount as a result of this virus. And the life expectancy of the typical victim might well be less than 2 years, given their age and existing conditions - so the virus is likely to make almost no difference to the total number of deaths over the next year or two. If you think it makes sense to spend €22 billion on this project, then you haven't considered the alternatives.
Dodge wrote: » What will be destroyed? Everything is just on pause. That’s all. Some jobs will be lost. Some more will be created. The same raw materials will still exist and the same corporations will still provide everything we want and need. It can obviously be discussed over and over again here but surely everybody realises deep down that most people would want to get back normality ASAP, and that when restrictions are removed that will happen naturally enough? Talk of society being destroyed is ridiculous
ITman88 wrote: » Nobody can argue with any single point made in this post.
KrustyUCC wrote: » It's not easy not seeing family, friends and those in relationships Many relationships won't survive this
brutes1 wrote: » Yes totally agree and would go farther and question the whole agenda re lockdown . Never happened before with bad flu or Swine flu seasons. Needs to end know. I am not sure if any politican has any courage to put forward this though it is incredible the lack of critical thinking. Although I understand questions are limited or not allowed at briefings and the Dail is shut. Why .
Ghost Dog 4 wrote: » Based on latest reports we have passed the peak I would hope restrictions case be eased from May 1 and get fully back to normal by June 30th
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » What latest reports are you looking at? We certainly have not passed the peak from this wave of the virus and won`t for weeks to come.
Larbre34 wrote: » I mentioned this yesterday and I'll say it again. A medic friend of mine works in a Dublin tertiary hospital that has been prepped to provide intensive care to the expected surge of cases. He told me on Sunday that the internal discussion in this hospital is for these restrictions to continue exactly as they are for 5/6 more weeks, with a gradual, closely monitored unwinding thereafter. Get used to it.
