Plumbthedepths wrote: » I'm not looking for a row but how can you describe these rules as not Draconian when you are not subject to them? Again I must say it you are resident in America so what is your personal experience of the rules up today other than secondhand information.
lainey_d_123 wrote: » Indeed. A lockdown like the one in Wuhan only works in a police state like China. The ones we have in the UK and Ireland are relying on people's goodwill because there is not the manpower to police it the way they have in China. As most people are decent and law abiding, compliance has generally been very good, but people simply cannot keep up this level of lockdown for much longer. I can already see people getting more lax in London, streets are getting busier, people touching their faces and getting complacent. This is always the risk with a situation like this, especially when we know most of us are going to get the virus eventually anyway. The mental strain of having to wash your hands constantly, make sure not to touch your face, worry about every single thing you've touched, sanitise all your groceries is exhausting. A lot of people are just going to feel like they'd rather risk getting sick than keep up this level of precautions. I suffer from OCD and it's life ruining, and now everyone is living like they have OCD. People are playing it down on here but it's a massively stressful situation. Not only being isolated and stuck at home but all the mental strain that comes with venturing out for groceries, or accepting a delivery. It's neverending and all consuming in a way very few things are.
Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: » Again: it's not the death rate that portrays the spread of the virus, it's the number of new cases. And it's the number of active cases that will portray whether a country's policies are or are not working. Herd immunity - and I'm not saying whether or not it's a good approach - has even less to do with the death rate; unless you can tell when these people got infected.
Tell me how wrote: » FFS. Because I am living under these conditions for longer than you are. By choice. Because I understand what is going on.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Do you believe anything coming out of official Chinese channels?
Bandana boy wrote: » I don't believe they have hidden between 1.4M and 5M deaths !
Plumbthedepths wrote: » So you made a choice, they were not imposed thanks for clarifying. There is a difference in the situation in Ireland and your self imposed restrictions you are free to release yourself from them anytime you wish. Try not to belittle the experience of others who are without your choice.
Tell me how wrote: » The rules are there because there is a need for them. Just because some people (a relatively small number all told I suspect) are not following them does not mean they should be removed. It's quite incredible to see these rules described as extremely draconian. The only way that makes sense is if you haven't actually heard of the virus or the impact it has had.
road_high wrote: » Of course they’re draconian- all non essential stores closed for weeks now, hundreds of thousands thrown onto welfare and all non essential travel banned and regulated by statute- of course they’re bloody draconian. I don’t have an issue with the necessity to implement them but that doesn’t make them not draconian. They are
Tell me how wrote: » You can exercise within 2km of home. You can go out for shopping or other essential tasks. You have access to food, shelter, heat, entertainment and information. Anyone considering the rules as draconian at this point in time are either being ignorant or selfish.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » I don't share your incredulity of what the Chinese would be capable of.
Blueshoe wrote: » It's not that bad at all.
brutes1 wrote: » 936 deaths. Only 46 of those without other health conditions . The numbers quoted hide the true picture. How many actually die because of Covid? Or how many die with it but as a result of their underlying condition. ?The vast majority I suspect Media and propaganda works. Question more. from BBC Britain's deadliest day since the Covid-19 outbreak began saw 936 more people die after testing positive. The Department for Health confirmed the UK-wide total of 7,172 included 828 deaths in England. Patients were aged between 22 and 103, including 46 people who had no known underlying conditions.
lainey_d_123 wrote: » Where do you live, Blueshoe? Do you live in an overcrowded city which is a hotspot for coronavirus, in a tiny flat with no outside space? Do you have to go out into crowded streets to get food?
ixoy wrote: » The problem of course is that some people no longer have a job, a source of income, and that's pretty essential to them and not just them being "selfish". I mean it's fine for me - I'm able to work from home - but I understand not everybody is in the same privileged position as me.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » have you tried being more stoic about the situation? your constant moaning isn't going to make anything better, just accept it how it is, it wont be forever.
Tell me how wrote: » Are you not advocating for a reduction in restrictions? Surely then the streets will only be busier?
Tell me how wrote: » Anyone considering the rules as draconian at this point in time are either being ignorant or selfish.
lainey_d_123 wrote: » No. I'm pointing out that this strict lockdown will inevitably need to end within the next 6 weeks. People simply will not keep it up any longer, and there aren't the resources to police it.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » It's like calling measures taken during the blitz draconian, things had to be done for the greater good
Thelonious Monk wrote: » have you tried being more stoic about the situation?
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Actually Pubs, parks, cinemas, theatres were all open during the Blitz, I'm not suggesting these should be open but it's best if you're going to use an analogy you chose something more relevant.
Tell me how wrote: » FFS. That is the intent of everyone! Especially the people who have implemented these short term rules. The better we adhere to them, the shorter the time they will be there for.
Nermal wrote: » Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?
