Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Relaxation of restrictions Part II

1…156157159161162…327

Comments

  • #4742
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    easypazz wrote: »
    No there won't be. Well, its possible but highly unlikely.

    The IMF would beg to disagree with your evident expert knowledge ...

    https://www.rte.ie/amp/1129580/


  • #4743
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Theboinkmaster wrote: »
    I 100% agree with the lockdown - buys time for health service to flatten curve and prepare for managing the virus for next 2 years.

    7 weeks now it's over, time to re-open slowly over the coming months.

    They've had enough time - we've done our part.

    I agree the time is coming to start to open up, step by step, however what have we actually done? And by we I mean those of us not on the frontline or maintaining critical services. Sit home and watch netflix and post ****e on boards. Maybe do a bit of extra gardening if we have that option. God help us. Our sacrifice will be remembered for generations to come.


  • #4744
    Penfailed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,680 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    easypazz wrote: »
    You made a sweeping statement everywhere was jammed.

    Not true.

    Fair enough. It was a sweeping statement to be fair.

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES, And So I Watch You From Afar

    Gigs '25 - Spiritualized, Supergrass, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Queens of the Stone Age, Electric Picnic, Vantastival



  • #4745
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    CalamariFritti wrote: »
    I've seen that being said a few times now. Is there any source for this? Not doubting just wanna know.
    It's an embellished narrative that some people have run with.

    In the second week of March, the HSE embarked on a programme of freeing up beds in hospitals by discharging or moving patients where possible.

    In the case of elderly patients, many were transferred (back) to nursing homes.

    This is standard practice and has been done many, many times before in order to free up beds.

    Covid-positive patients were NOT transferred. That was one of the explicit reasons that excluded a patient from being transferred.

    However, patients who were symptomatic or had been in contact wit a covid case, were eligible for transfer.

    Herein lies the rub - there is no evidence that anyone who was transferred, was symptomatic or had contact with a covid patient.

    However, the fact that they could have been, has led some nursing homes to lay the blame on infection spread at the door of the HSE. Claiming that they would be covid-free if it were not for the transfers. Many nursing homes operators have a troubled relationship with the HSE, and will relish any chance to get the boot in, whether they have evidence for it or not.

    The truth, as usual is somewhere in the middle. It seems likely that a small number of patients with Covid probably did end up in some nursing homes before testing positive. But the virus was already spreading, was already well established in many institutions. So the impact on these transfers is unlikely to have been large.
    The main reason it became such a problem in nursing homes was the difficulty of getting staff (thus individual staff members interacting with more patients) and the fact that they were deprioritised from getting supplies of PPE.


  • #4746
    Speakerboxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,023 ✭✭✭Speakerboxx


    gozunda wrote: »
    Your logic is truely based on historic levels of ignorance even compared to some of the other contributions on this thread.

    The current restrictions are designed to prevent our health service being overwhelmed and to continue to keep down levels of infection in the general population.

    That you seemingly cannot appreciate either of those two most basic concepts is truely staggering.

    Edit: And yes restrictions will be eased going forward. Will that be because you want it so? No.

    People are not adhering to restrictions anyway. Time to open the floodgates.


  • Advertisement
  • #4747
    JTMan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,574 ✭✭✭JTMan


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Normal office work won't be returning next month.

    Exactly. According to the Irish Times, reopening offices are in the "later phases" which seem to be in September along with schools. Nobody who is working from home will return to the office anytime soon.

    Working in offices, in most cases, is non-essential and should be left until last.


  • #4748
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    growleaves wrote: »

    Iowa with a population of 3.155 million has had 136 deaths with no lockdown. Its not all isolated farmland either, it has 30 cities.

    My partner is from Iowa and I've spent many Christmases there. It might have cities (well, towns really in most cases) but there is a lot of space in those cities. Social distancing is really easy. Buildings are huge - a startup hipster coffee shop in Europe might be crammed into a corner building whereas in Des Moines it is probably spread out over an old industrial warehouse floor. There is just a lot of space - the low deaths are IMO completely explainable by the fact that even city dwellers will be exposed to a far lower viral load


  • #4749
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    growleaves wrote: »
    Like I said, lame excuses about "Swedish culture" are supposed to explain the discrepancy between 1,000s of deaths and 100,000s of deaths (see above).

    Iowa with a population of 3.155 million has had 136 deaths with no lockdown. Its not all isolated farmland either, it has 30 cities.

    Handwashing, social distancing and other mitigation strategies play a role in preventing spread but the added edge gained by stopping people from working or seeing people they know may be quite small, especially given that outdoor transmission appears quite low.

    There will be scientific investigations into the actual efficacy of the lockdown in time.

    Connecticut, 3.5 million, 2,000 deaths.

    Who was claiming 100,000's deaths here by the way?


  • #4750
    Rodin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    Speakerboxx wrote: »
    People are not adhering to restrictions anyway. Time to open the floodgates.

    Like saying....
    There'll always be ways to outfox airport security.
    Might as well not have it


  • #4751
    easypazz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,346 ✭✭✭easypazz


    gozunda wrote: »
    The IMF would beg to disagree with your evident expert knowledge ...

    https://www.rte.ie/amp/1129580/

    Did you read the article?

    It undermines your argument.

    You said:

    Will there be an economic downturn globally next year? Yes there will.

    The IMF said:

    She warned that "global growth will turn sharply negative in 2020,"

    Even in the best case the IMF expects only a "partial recovery" next year,


    The downturn will happen this year, and output will reach a very low point, but once things reopen, there will be a modest upturn.


  • Advertisement
  • #4752
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    easypazz wrote: »
    Did you read the article?

    It undermines your argument.

    You said:

    Will there be an economic downturn globally next year? Yes there will.

    The IMF said:

    She warned that "global growth will turn sharply negative in 2020,"

    Even in the best case the IMF expects only a "partial recovery" next year,


    The downturn will happen this year, and output will reach a very low point, but once things reopen, there will be a modest upturn.

    The economy will recover. When will the dead recover?


  • #4753
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The economy will recover. When will the dead recover?

    The economy can also run out of money. At which point we wouldn't have money to pay people or invest in health. Then way more die.

    Too many foolish people on here that don't understand the importance of the economy.


  • #4754
    hmmm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,203 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    Speakerboxx wrote: »
    People are not adhering to restrictions anyway. Time to open the floodgates.
    Nonsense, the vast majority are.


  • #4755
    SAMTALK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,352 ✭✭✭SAMTALK


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The economy can also run out of money. At which point we wouldn't have money to pay people or invest in health. Then way more die.

    Too many foolish people on here that don't understand the importance of the economy.

    Nearly as many people that don't understand how important it is to adhere to regulations


  • #4756
    Speakerboxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,023 ✭✭✭Speakerboxx


    hmmm wrote: »
    Nonsense, the vast majority are.

    Not everyone is though and that's the problem.


  • #4757
    BillyBiggs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 167 ✭✭BillyBiggs


    Any stats available on how many are dying because they can’t have their operations in hospitals?


  • #4758
    JPCN1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 937 ✭✭✭JPCN1


    Long_Wave wrote: »
    There are 125 elected TDS who could remove Leo and co today if they wanted to but they choose not to.

    FG should be looking to offload him after that election result.


  • #4759
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,041 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    SAMTALK wrote: »
    Nearly as many people that don't understand how important it is to adhere to regulations
    It is possible to understand the need for a functioning economy and adhere to sensible regulations. They're not exclusive, nor is it a case of either health vs wealth.


  • #4760
    Speakerboxx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,023 ✭✭✭Speakerboxx


    SAMTALK wrote: »
    Nearly as many people that don't understand how important it is to adhere to regulations

    People are breaking all regulations. We don't see half of it.


  • #4761
    is_that_so
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    Speakerboxx wrote: »
    Not everyone is though and that's the problem.
    It was never expected to be 100%, just a pretty large majority.


  • Advertisement
  • #4762
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,277 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Speakerboxx wrote: »
    Not everyone is though and that's the problem.

    No but people are for the most part, and that's what's keeping the numbers down. There'll always be people who don't follow rules.


  • #4763
    Theboinkmaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,052 ✭✭✭Theboinkmaster


    gozunda wrote: »
    Your logic is truely based on historic levels of ignorance even compared to some of the other contributions on this thread.

    The current restrictions are designed to prevent our health service being overwhelmed and to continue to keep down levels of infection in the general population.

    That you seemingly cannot appreciate either of those two most basic concepts is truely staggering.

    Edit: And yes restrictions will be eased going forward. Will that be because you want it so? No.

    Your inability to read is staggering - I said this myself in post #4741.


  • #4764
    growleaves
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,978 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Who was claiming 100,000's deaths here by the way?

    Simon Harris: This could go well beyond the health service
    The Minister for Health Simon Harris has said that he is taking seriously the advice of expert epidemiologist Professor Sam McConkey who predicted there could be between 80,000 and 120,000 deaths in Ireland from coronavirus.

    The prediction of 100,000s of deaths were for bigger countries:

    Post #8132


  • #4765
    SAMTALK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,352 ✭✭✭SAMTALK


    ixoy wrote: »
    It is possible to understand the need for a functioning economy and adhere to sensible regulations. They're not exclusive, nor is it a case of either health vs wealth.

    Absoutely not. I totally agree with you but my point is that it's not all about the economy either

    We have to find a middle ground but the biggest problem is that you give an inch and people will take a mile so it's going to take time to sort this to a level that keeps people safe and also get the economy moving again

    People seem to think it's a case of " ok back to the way your were please "

    Plans / rules have to be put in place 1st . Employers have to understand it's not just a case of opening the doors again


  • #4766
    Theboinkmaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,052 ✭✭✭Theboinkmaster


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I agree the time is coming to start to open up, step by step, however what have we actually done? And by we I mean those of us not on the frontline or maintaining critical services. Sit home and watch netflix and post ****e on boards. Maybe do a bit of extra gardening if we have that option. God help us. Our sacrifice will be remembered for generations to come.

    That's an incredibly ignorant post. I'm loving the lockdown myself it suits me.

    However there are many many people in Ireland who are suffering seriously during this lockdown - women violence and children helpline call volumes up significantly proves this alone.


  • #4767
    Gael23
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,147 ✭✭✭✭Gael23


    Met a couple well up in their 80s out for a walk at lunchtime.
    The game is up


  • #4768
    Tell me how
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,031 ✭✭✭✭Tell me how


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The economy can also run out of money. At which point we wouldn't have money to pay people or invest in health. Then way more die.

    Too many foolish people on here that don't understand the importance of the economy.

    It is important, but, equally, it is not of paramount importance.

    If we were told a year ago that there would be a need to shut down as has been done, we would have been told that that would not happen, and that it couldn't happen.


  • #4769
    Hooked
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,914 ✭✭✭Hooked


    Deleted User wrote: »
    ECB can and will print money

    How does this "actually" work?
    Not sarcasm... genuine question.
    I'm a total economic numpty...


  • #4770
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Theboinkmaster wrote: »
    That's an incredibly ignorant post. I'm loving the lockdown myself it suits me.

    However there are many many people in Ireland who are suffering seriously during this lockdown - women violence and children helpline call volumes up significantly proves this alone.

    And the thousands of people who now wont die?


  • Advertisement
  • #4771
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,041 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    SAMTALK wrote: »
    People seem to think it's a case of " ok back to the way your were please "
    Do people actually think that? I see very little of that here. Most are calling for a gradual phased re-opening and are happy to see added security measures that weren't there before. Very very few asking, or expecting, for an immediate rollback. I imagine the general public is of the same opinion.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement