nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Relaxation of restrictions

Red Alert

Simon Harris curiously made a comment that there was a limit to how long people could put up with extreme level of restrictions as we currently have. Already we’re seeing in Italy that people are starting to get restless. So two big questions:

1) on Easter Sunday, do you think there will be further restrictions, no change with just an extension or some relaxation?

2) what will be the first thing rolled back?

My own guess would be: extension for at least 1 week. Then to allow some businesses like DIY shops to reopen, perhaps allow gatherings of 2/3 people, maybe a token increase on 2km.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Thelonious Monk

Idbatterim wrote: »

many are actually better off now, not working and on the E350 with no commute costs etc...

And hopefully will spend it when we open back up. This all may not turn out too badly, will be tough for a while though.

Logan Roy

Please ITman88, realism is not welcome 'round these parts.

ITman88

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Cost benefit analysis is all well and good it you are an analyst shaving off pennies buy reducing packaging on a product against the cost of a new production line.

It's a little bit different when you are dealing with people's lives. It's some real sociopathic craziness like we see in America and the UK to put an economic price on people's lives.

We could probably spend multiple billions on road safety infrastructure. Incorporating technology to prevent every collision.
We don’t.
We spend around 300-400m.
158 died last year.
Multiples more seriously injured.
Someone does a cost benefit analysis on it

housemouse

terrydel wrote: »

If it was your 70+ year old parent and a middle aged person who you were asked to choose between, who would you choose? Your post comes across as about as cold and lacking in any empathy or humanity as it is possible to be. Life is not measured on a spreadsheet.

If a government body is making the decision and it costs the same to extend one person's life by 2 years as it does to extend another person's by 20 years, then it should choose the latter. This is what happens in the UK and other countries which try to make the most out of limited resources.

I don't necessarily believe the government should have the power to make that decision, but that is what it should do, if it is making the decision.

In a world of finite resources, decisions have to be made. When they are made in a state of fear and panic, they tend to be poor ones.

terrydel

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 .

The hospitals WILL end up overwhelmed and many will die needlessly, how on earth can you a) not realise this (see Italy) and b) not be bothered by it?

housemouse

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Cost benefit analysis is all well and good it you are an analyst shaving off pennies buy reducing packaging on a product against the cost of a new production line.

It's a little bit different when you are dealing with people's lives. It's some real sociopathic craziness like we see in America and the UK to put an economic price on people's lives.

Every health budgeting decision requires putting a price on people's lives.

It is the inability of the population at large to process the reality of this which ultimately leads to poor decisions in government.

ITman88

Gael23 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coronavirus-ireland-s-infection-peak-may-have-passed-toll-could-hit-400-by-august-report-forecasts-1.4223043?mode=amp

I never understand those death predictions.

They are saying 400 deaths, is that 400 over the 10,000 we would normally expect in this period?

Idbatterim

beggars_bush wrote: »

A lot of staff from creches earning more now while at home

would it not have been better to put money into peoples pockets, if thats they way you want to go about it, when businesses actually re-open. I am not saying its an easy scenario. But they maybe should have said, if you need more than standard welfare, it will be clawed back from future taxes or welfare...

terrydel

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.

If it was your 70+ year old parent and a middle aged person who you were asked to choose between, who would you choose? Your post comes across as about as cold and lacking in any empathy or humanity as it is possible to be. Life is not measured on a spreadsheet.
You are a complete sociopath going on that post.

Idbatterim

threeball wrote: »

All countries are in the same boat. There will be debt write down or massive injections. Italy won't survive without this.

yeah its going to be very interesting. Germany wont be able to point the finger at the reckless PIIGS again and say this is of your own doing. Its going to be very interesting...

Retr0gamer

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.

Cost benefit analysis is all well and good it you are an analyst shaving off pennies buy reducing packaging on a product against the cost of a new production line.

It's a little bit different when you are dealing with people's lives. It's some real sociopathic craziness like we see in America and the UK to put an economic price on people's lives.

Idbatterim

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Do you think so?

I know several that are... Look, they have paid into the system, they are far more worthy of it, than hundreds of thousands of others here, bleeding the system dry from cradle to grave, supported by FG etc. I just know in quite a lot of cases, say someone on twenty hour week, min wage, roughly a tenner. Two hundred odd. Now getting E350 and you have to bear in mind, many if living at home etc, wont have to pay rent or virtually anything out of it...

beggars_bush

Idbatterim wrote: »

many are actually better off now, not working and on the E350 with no commute costs etc...

A lot of staff from creches earning more now while at home

Gael23

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coronavirus-ireland-s-infection-peak-may-have-passed-toll-could-hit-400-by-august-report-forecasts-1.4223043?mode=amp

Theboinkmaster

bubblypop wrote: »

Frontline worker here.
Funny you speaking for all over 70s there, the majority I speak with, every day, seem to be very happy with the way it is right now. They know it's not forever & they are very resilient.
A lot more than the snowflakes I see posting on here

But do they know they could be doing this for the next 12 months?

There's no way out of this fully until a vaccine is developed. We're going to be living with COVID-19 and some sort of restrictions for the next 12-18 months and vulnerable and > 70s are going to be very restricted/cocooning for that period.

Idbatterim

fleet_admiral wrote: »

Agree, I'm hoping to be back at the end of June

brining up pubs, honestly that is likely the main one people would love to open again. Can they not just use youngish people behind the bar and in all of the roles, to stop risk of staff most likely being in a bad way, if they get it...

Assetbacked

donaghs wrote: »

When did the gubberment realise they had an endless supply of free money? Could it ever end?

There was enough money pumped into the banks after 2008 to get them operational again. This time the money will be pumped into the citizens to keep them functioning. Same thing, more humane.

IAMAMORON

Idbatterim wrote: »

many are actually better off now, not working and on the E350 with no commute costs etc...

Do you think so?

fleet_admiral

Lwaker. wrote: »

LVA got their own experts modelling the curve lol

Going on HSE advice

Plumbthedepths

Padre_Pio wrote: »

I have to agree.

Everyone I know is fine with the way things are. It's not idea, but some posters would have you believe people are committing seppuku for the want of a pint or football.

This is only temporary. No one knows exactly how temporary, but considering mortgages and many bills have paused, and people have little to spend their money on, it's not as bad as the 2008 recession.

People are probably back in work. Social distancing policies have been implemented and are working. They've taken 3/4 of the chairs out of our canteen and scheduled breaks so places are not overcrowded. People are asked to work from home, but it's fine if they come in and maintain distance.

Mortgages and bills have paused? When did this happen?. I got an electricity bill yesterday, my phone bill is due next week. My mortgage payment was taken out on the first of this month.

Sweet.Science

Dont know whats funnier

People who think restrictions will be lifted on Thursday or those that think they will last until September

fleet_admiral

Gael23 wrote: »

There. wont be any pubs in existance by Halloween if it goes on that long

Agree, I'm hoping to be back at the end of June

Idbatterim

donaghs wrote: »

When did the gubberment realise they had an endless supply of free money? Could it ever end?

your point is very valied, I mean constantly we are told here, there is no money for this, no money for that, even for important areas. All of a sudden , the same as the bank bailouts, they can produces tens of billions, when they couldnt have produced a billion cents before :rolleyes:

It seems there is either no money or endless money!

Lwaker.

donaghs wrote: »

When did the gubberment realise they had an endless supply of free money? Could it ever end?

Economy taking a back seat

No politician wants to get caught out with the curve like Italy

donaghs

Idbatterim wrote: »

many are actually better off now, not working and on the E350 with no commute costs etc...

When did the gubberment realise they had an endless supply of free money? Could it ever end?

donaghs

Padre_Pio wrote: »

I have to agree.

Everyone I know is fine with the way things are. It's not idea, but some posters would have you believe people are committing seppuku for the want of a pint or football.

This is only temporary. No one knows exactly how temporary, but considering mortgages and many bills have paused, and people have little to spend their money on, it's not as bad as the 2008 recession.

The 2008 recession didn't actually affect many people in 2008. But it did go on for quite a few years after. The unprecedented global economic shutdown could surely be worse?

Idbatterim

many are actually better off now, not working and on the E350 with no commute costs etc...

[Deleted User]

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

A lot more jobs will be lost than created, you can't equate the two like that.

Padre_Pio

bubblypop wrote: »

Frontline worker here.
Funny you speaking for all over 70s there, the majority I speak with, every day, seem to be very happy with the way it is right now. They know it's not forever & they are very resilient.
A lot more than the snowflakes I see posting on here

I have to agree.

Everyone I know is fine with the way things are. It's not idea, but some posters would have you believe people are committing seppuku for the want of a pint or football.

This is only temporary. No one knows exactly how temporary, but considering mortgages and many bills have paused, and people have little to spend their money on, it's not as bad as the 2008 recession.

Deleted User wrote: »

couldnt agree more! I was working the last few days but I'm off today. Huge increase in people out walking especially much older people, huge increase in traffic. No comparison to last week.

People are probably back in work. Social distancing policies have been implemented and are working. They've taken 3/4 of the chairs out of our canteen and scheduled breaks so places are not overcrowded. People are asked to work from home, but it's fine if they come in and maintain distance.

[Deleted User]

KevRossi wrote: »

This is purely anecdotal, but I go for a walk every morning from 6.30-8.30 in a big rectangle around the house. My route crosses many busy commuter routes such as Dorset St, Finglas Rd. East Wall Rd, Clontarf Rd.

The number of cars on the road this week has shot up compared to last week. I usually take a small digital camera with me, took loads of photos of deserted streets last week and today it looks like a Saturday morning. A lot of people are sick of the lockdown and are on the move again, which isn't good.

couldnt agree more! I was working the last few days but I'm off today. Huge increase in people out walking especially much older people, huge increase in traffic. No comparison to last week.