Spanish Eyes wrote: » I think I'd be happy enough to pay a 1% levy for a while to get the country going again. This 350 subsidy and other supports costs us all, but am very glad they did it, takes the pressure off. I know I will be told I am privileged, wealthy, can afford it etc. Doesn't matter what's thrown at me, it's a collective effort now, and those who can should be willing to step up to the plate. Having said that, would anyone think that supermarkets, chemists and off licences, take aways etc. should pay something extra too going forward due to the fact that for weeks they are and probably will be the only elements of the economy that have been open.
zerosugarbuzz wrote: » I disagree, I think we are ready for it now, serious easing of the lockdown from May 5th. .
Spanish Eyes wrote: » I think I'd be happy enough to pay a 1% levy for a while to get the country going again. This 350 subsidy and other supports costs us all, but am very glad they did it, takes the pressure off. I know I will be told I am privileged, wealthy, can afford it etc. Doesn't matter what's thrown at me, it's a collective effort now, and those who can should be willing to step up to the plate. Having said that, would anyone think that supermarkets, chemists and off licences, take aways etc. should pay something extra too going forward due to the fact that for weeks they have been the only elements of the economy that have been open. A Corporation tax levy for the extra time they could trade. Would obviously apply to other companies too.
facehugger99 wrote: » If you think this is only going to cost you a "1% levy for a while", you a quite, quite deluded.
AdamD wrote: » Class, lets lose 3 bank holidays. Life is great. If they're going to do that I'd like to see them at least attempt to move the bank holiday to later in the year.
awec wrote: » 1%? Try many multiples of that. They introduced USC to plug the hole the last time, and that had rates up to 8% at the time. We're still paying it. How would you feel if they doubled USC?
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » When and if it is reasonably safe to do so. Clearly we are not anywhere near that point now.
facehugger99 wrote: » Anyone who frames the question, as a choice between a economically-devastating lockdown on one hand and death on the other, can safely be dismissed as a moron. I wouldn't waste my time even trying to argue with them.
FintanMcluskey wrote: » A frame of mind exists where people have been lead to believe we are "saving lives". Another popular sound bite is "if we can't protect our most vulnerable we have failed as a society". Our most vulnerable are the ones that should be in school. They will suffer the longest, for the rest of their lives. The ones we are supposedly protecting wont suffer for long, a small number of years at best. We have always sacrificed lives to ensure the future of society. Every war since time began sacrificed the fittest and strongest of society for the protection of the future. We can only save a life up until a point that that life can no longer give life. Everything else is prolonging a life
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Might have to happen. I wouldn't be grinning from ear to ear, but what else is there. Welcome your own solutions to the hole in finances going forward.
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » I suppose too you would be in favour of euthanizing the elderly as they have outlived their usefulness. Am I right?
omeara1113 wrote: » Why is everyone so bent on the construction sector opening do ye not think them people deserve the same safety as everyone else.All I see posted here is restrictions will be relaxed ie. construction ,rediculous
awec wrote: » The solution is to minimise the hole as much as possible. We need to realise that the longer lockdown goes on, the worst it's going to be for everyone. There are a few posters on here who have deluded themselves into thinking the financial consequences are going to be lower profits for corporations, and maybe giving up the sun holidays for a few years. The reality is that many people are going to be completely ruined. They will have absolutely nothing, and the state will have nothing to give them. There is a human cost, and it is also going to cost lives. We have to find the balance between being safe, and minimising covid as much as practically possible, with also ensuring that we aren't just rearranging the deckchairs on the titanic with the absolute tsunami of misery that's coming down the tracks. The 350 dole was a good idea and necessary, but the flip side is it has given people a sense of comfort and a lack of appreciation of just how big a problem is heading their way.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Perhaps some are becoming complacent because the stats are veering towards a huge incidence of death and infection in care settings. Maybe that makes some people think the virus won't affect them because they are young, healthy and their kids are healthy. Think about it long and hard though. But I really think the emphasis on care settings in the stats will lead to rebellion by those who are not involved, do not have anyone in care homes and are young and invincible.
BanditLuke wrote: » Plenty of posters here would in a heartbeat. They'll never admit it but all that matters to them is the economy not society.
FintanMcluskey wrote: » The lockdown wont save one single nursing home patient from the grim reaper. And even if you are in the dodgy age group you still arent at much risk of Covid bringing you. What do you think is going to happen when we realise the death rate is completely stable overall this year? Someone will be held accountable for this mess
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » FYP.
stephenjmcd wrote: » You do realise that the last thing employers will want when they get staff back in is to lose them for even 1 day. In my own job we're being told to take any planned time off over the summer if possible as the industry we're in they expect a significant bounce back and increased workload September through to Christmas.
Penfailed wrote: » What?! ...why?
FintanMcluskey wrote: » What do you think is going to happen when we realise the death rate is completely stable overall this year? Someone will be held accountable for this mess
awec wrote: » It never ceases to amaze me just how slow some posters are on here. Have people still not grasped that without an economy is there is no society? Without an economy, there is no health service. Without an economy, we cannot fight covid19. It is impossible. "Blah blah blah you just care about making money". No, I care about people being able to feed and house their family. I care that when they go to the doctor, the doctor has the equipment and medicine required to treat them. I care that they can pay their mortgage / rent every month. I wonder if you'll be so smug to the faces of the families who'll be queueing at the foodbanks before hiking back to their shelters after this?
fr336 wrote: » Where do you get the impression that will be the case? And would it be the case without a lockdown? Are you happy to be held accounable if a badly managed easing of restrictions leads to exponential growth in cases and deaths?
fr336 wrote: » This is hilarious. The best bit of the get the show back on the road crowd is their use of other segments of society to justify their argument, in this case schoolkids. "Oh won't someone think of the schoolkids, they're losing out on their education and will pay for the rest of their lives". School terms can be rearranged, kids can still be educated. You can't bring people back to life. It seems your actual concern is the economy and money.
fr336 wrote: » There is no such thing as society, as their hero Maggie once said. Except when it comes to that same society (i.e. our bloody taxes) bailing out banks and big business time and time again... There is also a lack of appreciation from these people of how society functions and how their apparent success may not always be down to their genius and them alone. But hey ho
fr336 wrote: » Do it every day myself. Lovely sunny walks. Doesn't mean I want people crammed into offices and public transport again during the week and crammed into shopping centres at the weekend.
BanditLuke wrote: » It's the same posters time and again with the same old yarn. Some of them are losing the plot with our soft lockdown and having to spend time away from work and with their families. They don't care about what sacrifices our elders made for us in forming our country and keeping us afloat in times of peril. They had no skiing holiday, no shopping trips to NY, two weeks in the south of France, two cars (most barely had a car at all), great healthcare etc..and now when our elderly need us the most it's fvuk them. As you say Maggie worshippers.
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » What makes you think it will be completely stable overall this year? What evidence do you have for that statement?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/8a022abb175d445f2b5b8a1c545f3d3f.svg)
