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

Pete_Cavan

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

You are over-simplifying things. It is not a case of saving any individual person or not. There are many other implications of any decision made. How many people are missing out on other medical procedures not being carried out (not necessarily life saving ones but certainly life changing ones)? How many are suffering mental health issues from lack of social contact, financial issues due to losing job, etc? I know of young children who are really struggling to cope with lack of interaction forced by something they don't understand and are showing personality changes. Any reasonable person will consider these people too, not just the one person you want to look at.

The virus kills some people, that is unavoidable (most likely because the damage caused by the virus is compounded by another medical issue). Our health service is coping, ICUs are well within capacity, everyone who needs treatment is getting it, yet some are still dying. Deaths, while tragic, are not the only factor here.

Those in high risk categories can substantially reduce the risk to themselves by continuing to isolate and take precautions. The fastest way for them to then return to normality is if immunity is built up in the general population. The virus will still exist so continued lockdown achieves little.

acequion

Queasy Tadpole wrote: »

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

Thank you for your honesty and I really feel for you.

This post highlights the problem with an indefinite enforced lockdown and that has to be taken into account.

While, we may have no alternative currently, the lockdown fetishists and totalitarianists need to realise that for many the situation is becoming intolerable and ultimately will be unsustainable.

I don't have an alternative and can only put my trust and hope in the scientists working flat out to find a treatment and a vaccine, but let's all be honest and let's allow all opinions.

[Deleted User]

terrydel wrote: »

You failure to answer is so telling.

You don't expect the individual concerned to be happy with the decision.

But you can and should be aware, if you want to have a conversation about health policy, that these decisions are made all the time and in fact all health spending and investment is completely impossible without making them.

If, for example, an Irish child has a rare disease and the government estimates that an investment of 20bn euro will find a cure, I would expect that child's parents to want that to happen.

However, the government will almost certainly not spend that money because there are other ways it can be allocated that will deliver a greater benefit to a greater number.

Please tell me you understand this? You can't have a sensible conversation about health policy if you don't.

Cyrus

So it looks like the more proactive countries are now looking at relaxing some of the restrictions,

im presuming we wont be as quick but im hoping 2 weeks after this will see some movement.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I did answer you, problem is I didn't give you the answer you wanted.

You didnt, at all. But thats alright, your refusal betrayed you.

Cyrus

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Universities are marked in for May I believe

Also from that report

Norway is to lift some of its restrictions imposed to curb the spread of coronavirus, its prime minister has told a press conference.

“Together we have taken control of the virus, therefore we can open up society little by little,” Erna Solberg was quoted as saying by Reuters.

It joins Denmark and Austria in making plans to emerge from the lockdown conditions that have been imposed by governments across Europe.

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

You failure to answer is so telling.

I did answer you, problem is I didn't give you the answer you wanted.

begbysback

Queasy Tadpole wrote: »

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

Desensitization, very normal

Queasy Tadpole

I'm going up the wall. The restrictions are now really starting to get me. I've already been hit terribly financially, socially... it's getting to the stage now where I'm caring less and less about people I don't know dying and that is just horrible to think about.

I've lost many loved ones and know the pain and never ending grief but I feel myself becoming quite cold towards others now.

Harry Palmr

Cyrus wrote: »

Daycare nurseries, kindergartens and primary schools will reopen in Denmark from 15 April, its prime minister has said, making it the second European country after Austria to unveil its plans for a gradual easing of restrictions.

According to a report on AFP, Mette Frederiksen said that according to health authorities “it is appropriate and justified to start a slow opening. But on condition that everyone keeps their distance and washes their hands.”

Universities are marked in for May I believe

Also from that report

Not all sections of the Danish economy have suffered from the lockdown. The country’s biggest retailer of sex toys says that sales have doubled since Danes were told to stay at home, Reuters reports.

In the first week of April, sales at Sinful rose 110% in Denmark, where it estimates it commands three-quarters of the total market, while the country’s biggest sex toy review website Eroti.dk said traffic has more than tripled during the lockdown compared with the same period last year.

In particular demand for sex games and toys for couples has spiked. Sinful said sales of a 10-day love challenge for couples rose more than four-fold since mid-March compared with the same period before the lockdown.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Actually a simple yes or no does not suffice. The reasons are I'm not the one who prioritises resources. Whether I'm fine or not is irrelevant.
Life is not black or white as much as you'd like to protray it is.

You failure to answer is so telling.

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

Actually a simple yes or no does not suffice. The reasons are I'm not the one who prioritises resources. Whether I'm fine or not is irrelevant.
Life is not black or white as much as you'd like to protray it is.

terrydel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Did you ever hear of a professional called an Actuary? Guess what purpose they serve for the insurance industry ?
Revenue regards citizens as 'economic units'.

So I'll ask again, if your parent is on the wrong end of a decision based on the category of 'economic unit' they are in, you are personally fine with that?
A simple yes or no will suffice.

Its so easy for you to comment like you have, in the abstract, but the people dealing with and making these decisions now can effectively see the faces of the people their decisions will effect. They had a choice between allowing what happened in italy to happen here, massive numbers of avoidable deaths and a health system completely overwhelmed to the point it was not fit for purpose, or the choice they took, there was little to no other option open.

Cyrus

Daycare nurseries, kindergartens and primary schools will reopen in Denmark from 15 April, its prime minister has said, making it the second European country after Austria to unveil its plans for a gradual easing of restrictions.

According to a report on AFP, Mette Frederiksen said that according to health authorities “it is appropriate and justified to start a slow opening. But on condition that everyone keeps their distance and washes their hands.”

Bars, restaurants, nightclubs, shopping centres, hairdressers and massage parlours will remain closed, and gatherings of more than 10 people are still prohibited.

“Daily life is not going to return as before for the moment. We will live with many restrictions for many more months,” the prime minister warned.

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

You should talk to people who make decisions about how to spend money on healthcare. You'll find that they sometimes use a spreadsheet.

Are you being deliberately idiotic?

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

There were plenty of facts and numbers given in my original post.

Many people can't process the reality of finite resources and health budgeting, so they react like you do, instead of adding to the discussion.

Have a good day.

There was nothing that showed the current decisions are poor. So pointless opinion is all it was.

terrydel

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The thing about the restrictions is, vulnerable people can (and probably should) self-restrict even after restrictions generally have eased. Not doing so is effectively the person making the decision you mention above for themselves. As long as the health system is coping, such dilemmas are not more common than is normally the case (and these dilemmas do exist in normal times). How about the people not currently having other necessary medical treatments, where do they fit in in your over-simplified scenario?

One of those is my mother. She has had her own treatment delayed because of the current crisis and is completely at peace with it. Thats enough for me.
The alternative is to actually allow loads to die NOW, and to willfully allow what has happened in Italy to happen here. thats the only other option.

growleaves

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

I'm glad you concede that medical advice can't be the sole criteria for governance of the country, which not everyone is prepared to concede.

Medical statistics are notoriously difficult to work with.

The abstract models created by medical experts leading this pandemic response are based on multiple assumptions which might be true or untrue (and with other assumptions possibly missing). There are credible experts with competing models based on different assumptions who have been sidelined by mainstream media and governments, though they come from mainstream universities.

Where the biases come into play is in which medical statisticians and experts we choose to listen to.

The kind of society we are derives its morality from mass emotions, so if the dominant emotion is fear we will work off the most-cautious assumptions and believe this to be laudatory. We believe our stance to be moral not scientific - which is why you see active condemnation of other countries like Sweden etc. There's no scientific reason to be angry at the PM of Sweden.

Upon that foundation we've piled multiple other assumptions, such as that highly damaging yet scientifically unproven measures like social distancing and lockdown are necessary and will be effective. This is something we don't know, though many think they know. Again it becomes a moral imperative because it might be true plus our earlier assumptions might be true.

Compare to how how a previous society dealt with similar adversity:

During the 1957 flu panemic, which killed 1.1 million people worldwide, the full extent of our shutdown was the temporary closure of 17 schools in South Dublin.

Plumbthedepths

terrydel wrote: »

You added nothing other than turning human life into cells on a spreadsheet, I'll have a great day knowing Im not you.

Did you ever hear of a professional called an Actuary? Guess what purpose they serve for the insurance industry ?
Revenue regards citizens as 'economic units'.

KrustyUCC

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

The majority you speak to might be happy and resilient now but who knows the longer things go on

Would have been a good post bar the last sentence

No need for it

People have different opinions and their opinions might be as right as yours

lainey_d_123

KiKi III wrote: »

No, they're not.

If you adjust for population, there's a difference of about 25%, which is massive.

No, it isn't massive. Things may well change, but as it stands, there is only the tiniest percentage more chance of dying in Sweden compared to Denmark. You can do the knee jerk 'every life is important' thing if you like, but it's ridiculously simplistic.

What about the people in Denmark who are going to die of other things because they can't access proper healthcare during the lockdown? Suicides? Self harm? Domestic violence? I'd bet there is not such a huge difference when you factor this stuff in, not to mention the damage to the economy as a whole. It's all well and good to say lives are more important than money, but who is going to fund all this if nobody is working?

housemouse

terrydel wrote: »

You added nothing other than turning human life into cells on a spreadsheet, I'll have a great day knowing Im not you.

You should talk to people who make decisions about how to spend money on healthcare. You'll find that they sometimes use a spreadsheet.

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

There were plenty of facts and numbers given in my original post.

Many people can't process the reality of finite resources and health budgeting, so they react like you do, instead of adding to the discussion.

Have a good day.

You added nothing other than turning human life into cells on a spreadsheet, I'll have a great day knowing Im not you.

Pete_Cavan

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, they are choosing your old parent or someone half that age, do you fully endorse the decision to allow your parent die in the scenario you are effectively advocating?
Unless you have facts, numbers and details to back up your assertion that the decisions taken are poor, your statements have no merit whatsoever and are nothing more than your opinion.

The thing about the restrictions is, vulnerable people can (and probably should) self-restrict even after restrictions generally have eased. Not doing so is effectively the person making the decision you mention above for themselves. As long as the health system is coping, such dilemmas are not more common than is normally the case (and these dilemmas do exist in normal times). How about the people not currently having other necessary medical treatments, where do they fit in in your over-simplified scenario?

ITman88

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Builders providers are still open. You can still buy paint if you want.

I don’t want to come across as pedantic, but you can’t around the west of Ireland.

Any hardware shops still operating will stock farming supplies around here.

Only essential farming supplies can be bought.

If it’s on the shelves and it’s not for the purpose of essential farming it can’t be bought.

That may not be countywide though

lainey_d_123

Padre_Pio wrote: »

I don't know anything about domestic violence, but I don't see how banning alcohol is going to do much to alleviate domestic violence. An abusive relationship is still abusive, whether alcohol is involved or no. At the same time, the 99.99% of people who drink responsibly are going to go spare and start breaking restrictions.

As my mother would say, it's ridiculous she has to go out shopping twice on Sunday, as she can't buy wine before 10am. What's the point of having a dedicated time for over 60's when parts of the shop are still shut?

Builders providers are still open. You can still buy paint if you want.

Ya know i doubt that. The hordes of people on Harcourt street every night aren't sitting at home now necking vodka and red bull.

You are having a go at people who are at risk of depression, self harm or violence expressing how hard they are finding this lockdown and basically telling them to suck it up, but you think it's fine for your 60+ high risk mother, the kind of person we're all making these huge sacrifices for, to make a special trip to the shops to buy wine?

Jesus Christ.

housemouse

terrydel wrote: »

So I'll ask again, they are choosing your old parent or someone half that age, do you fully endorse the decision to allow your parent die in the scenario you are effectively advocating?
Unless you have facts, numbers and details to back up your assertion that the decisions taken are poor, your statements have no merit whatsoever and are nothing more than your opinion.

There were plenty of facts and numbers given in my original post.

Many people can't process the reality of finite resources and health budgeting, so they react like you do, instead of adding to the discussion.

Have a good day.

polesheep

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.

Day in, day out, we put an economic value of people's lives. We've been doing so since neolithic times. Mammoth meat didn't come easily.

terrydel

housemouse wrote: »

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.

So I'll ask again, they are choosing your old parent or someone half that age, do you fully endorse the decision to allow your parent die in the scenario you are effectively advocating?
Unless you have facts, numbers and details to back up your assertion that the decisions taken are poor, your statements have no merit whatsoever and are nothing more than your opinion.

terrydel

Idbatterim wrote: »

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...

`Who are these 100s of 1000s? Do you ever change your tune from out and out uninformed bigotry?