Ace2007 wrote: » What if you don't have kids, what if you kids are grown up - what if you want society and the economy to get back to normal. what if you want to live your life. You say people need to be realistic because of the age profile of those affected, but if it was affecting younger age group - you wouldn't be saying we need to be realistic - your staying it would have to be different. This virus could kill children who are high risk - but is it because these high risk children are not high in numbers, then we don't care about them?
easypazz wrote: » people won't accept it much longer.
stephenjmcd wrote: » They'll be shut down again. The powers lapse at midnight Sunday that mistakenly says they can open. All being advised not to open. Lockdown will be extended tomorrow so no they won't be open unless they are brought back under essential services after Sunday night.
easypazz wrote: » Save us the faux outrage. Of course the ideal scenario is this goes away in a few weeks and we all live happily ever after. But we can't support a lockdown indefinitely, and people won't accept it much longer. We have to play the hand we are dealt, it mainly kills old people. No point in worrying now about an imaginary virus that mainly affects young people.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Am I naive to think the vast majority of people will accept whatever the Government tells us we need to do until told otherwise?
Ace2007 wrote: » I'll approach this a different way for you - those in nursing homes are not going to hospital if they get the virus, therefore whose ending up in hospital?? - 62% of all confirmed cases are people under 54. If we open up society too soon, hospitals will get overrun, and so while the age profile of deaths might be high now, overrun hospitals will lead to more deaths, and inevitable younger people will pass away.But of course that will be ok, because people will be back at work and what's a few deaths eh?
easypazz wrote: » But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election .
Hoboo wrote: » How would that work
Ace2007 wrote: » I'll approach this a different way for you - those in nursing homes are not going to hospital if they get the virus, therefore whose ending up in hospital?? - 62% of all confirmed cases are people under 54. If we open up society too soon, hospitals will get overrun, and so while the age profile of deaths might be high now, overrun hospitals will lead to more deaths, and inevitable younger people will pass away. But of course that will be ok, because people will be back at work and what's a few deaths eh?
easypazz wrote: » Extremely. The current, caretaker, government have no mandate for this, people are accepting of it and going along with it, for now. But if this isn't resolved soon then there would need to be a general election with different parties setting out different strategies to deal with this.
Ace2007 wrote: » Second election won't solve anything - be at the exact same situation as we are now.
Ace2007 wrote: » It doesn't have to be risky, if your told not to do something - then why do it?
Plumbthedepths wrote: » The 62% under 54 going to hospital how many have died. The biggest problem here if you ignore the lack of testing is despite being aware of the most at risk demographic from the Italian experience our CMO railled at the nursing homes restricting visitors. The homes should have closed no visitors and no contract staff moving between homes. Now you do know where the majority clusters and deaths have occurred I take it?
Idbatterim wrote: » yeah, might well have SF with the most seats if given another shot though!
d15ude wrote: » Because we are a free democratic society, and don't just need to do as we are told!
easypazz wrote: » And you know this because?
Ace2007 wrote: » I believe 195 people have died in the hospitals, so that leaves what 40 that but have died in nursing homes or other settings
ITman88 wrote: » Another poster alluded to it, the scariest thing about Covid is people’s lack of ability to think for themselves. On the other hand if you convince people something is bad enough, they will beg for protection at all costs. That’s what’s happening, people are so utterly petrified from the media whipping up a storm that they genuinely believe it is worth crippling the economy long term to prevent pain in the short term. They can’t see the wood from the trees with Covid. The wood form the trees will be quiet clear when social welfare benefit is cut and the health care budget is halved.
ITman88 wrote: » Ah FFS. Not a plan in the world. At some point, someone somewhere in Ireland needs to suggest an economic assessment. Media loving doctors will not preform that economic assessment.
Thelonious Monk wrote: » Even if we opened everything up tomorrow, the economy is still a basket case with no one wanting to go out, and the rest of the world being in shutdown. This isn't solely down to the Irish Government's approach to the situation, it's a global economy and a global problem, so whatever we do here won't make much of a difference anyway, our GDP will be way down and unemployment skyrocketing.
Diarmuid wrote: » Up until they can't afford to pay the bills. Tunes will change then
TheCitizen wrote: » Should re open headshops as well. Time to Grow your own
road_high wrote: » Last opinion poll was fairly telling yes
jmayo wrote: » Forget trying to reason with some around here. Some seem to think we can have a functioning economy despite this pandemic. Or else they couldn't give two sh**s and just don't want the inconvenience and the economy is just a pretense.
Carfacemandog wrote: » Looks like the Canadians have kept the weed shops open so....... Mind you it's legal over there to begin with!
FloatingVoter wrote: » My 80 year old aunt (living in Toronto) has taken up smoking. Due to being pissed off by the depressing current news (and Donald Trump is an underlying issue). Fair ****s.
