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 Part II

Tokyo

Continuation of the "Relaxation of restrictions" from here.

Please note that all mod warnings and threadbans carry through from the previous thread.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Spanish Eyes

To be fair I think the vast majority of people have adhered to the rules. That has saved us a lot of infections and deaths.

There will always be the mavericks who think the rules are for everyone else, but they are a tiny cohort in the big scheme of things.

Anyway, there WILL be an easing of restrictions on a very gradual basis. Leo V is saying what he said to curb the enthusiasm of those chomping at the bit who think they can do what they want come Tuesday. Some people can be quite immature and selfish, and therefore must be put back in their box with a reality check.

It is hard, it is painful, but has helped save many lives. I'd rather see my family alive than in hospital or worse. That's what it's about, and we can argue all day about the HSE, the Gov, yada yada. They are also finding things out as they go along, and it's not an easy gig. No one really knows which is the best path to take anywhere in the World really.

I will do whatever is asked of me for the good of everyone, and I don't care about those who are so immature that they cannot see the bigger picture.

Jinglejangle69

Gael23 wrote: »

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

Its not a game.

Neither are people's lives.

KrustyUCC

Gael23 wrote: »

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

That was never a law just a recommendation to cocoon

Hell of a lot of those in 70s up kept going out for walks

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.

also when you talk about sacrifice....

what about the economic Armageddon that's going to happen when the government 12 week subsidy ends?

20%+ unemployment?

Did you see IAG 12,000 jobs losses yesterday.

Theboinkmaster

Deleted User wrote: »

And the thousands of people who now wont die?

You need to learn to read - I agree with the lockdown over the past 7 weeks.

pgj2015

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.

It is very hard to stay at home when you are used to working hard away from the home, not able to visit parents/partners, not able to play or watch sport, no cinema, foreign travel, holidays, no life basically, it is just existing in a limbo for a lot of people. it is a sacrifice and 99% of the population have been very good at doing what they are told. a few more months of this though and i really worry for some peoples state of mind.

[Deleted User]

Hooked wrote: »

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

Very basic: Essentially money is the confidence people have that it has value. A central bank can issue debt to create the money - i.e a line item on a balance sheet someone. Someone else, usually a bank can then take that debt and pass it on as loans. As long as there is someone to pay pack the loans at some point the money is liquid - has value. The big risk is if you issue too much, the value will fall and confidence will be lost. As an engineer I don't understand much beyond that

Speakerboxx

is_that_so wrote: »

It was never expected to be 100%, just a pretty large majority.

It hardly is that either if you ask me.

[Deleted User]

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

also when you talk about sacrifice....

what about the economic Armageddon that's going to happen when the government 12 week subsidy ends?

20%+ unemployment?

Did you see IAG 12,000 jobs losses yesterday.

Economies will recover. Dead people wont

Cantona's Collars

Just now on BBC there's a widow speaking who lost her husband who died in ICU beside his brother. Both in their 50's.
She pleaded with people to stop disobeying the stay at home recommendations, people to stop going to parks, having parties and barbecues.
So many are thinking now "ah sure, I don't know anyone around me who's gotten it" that they are returning to old habits.

growleaves

I've adhered to the rules but I refuse to burn incense to the cruel gods of lockdown.

Phantom projections have already been shown to be false and quietly retracted. I'm not going to praise the lockdown gods for banishing these phantoms.

Unless someone has a personal interest in being holed up in their dwelling they should be demanding extraordinary proof after this is over to establish how effective the lockdown was.

Because the once the lockdown is over the only interest you might have in defending it as such is because you don't want to admit you were wrong or change your emotional landscape. (Or maybe you are a government supporter or because "other countries" did it too and "other countries" are never wrong.)

[Deleted User]

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

You need to learn to read - I agree with the lockdown over the past 7 weeks.

My point is the fact the some people are struggling with the lockdown is not a reason to end it in and of itself. Yes some will struggle, but end it too soon and thousands will die with little dignity in an overwhelmed health system. I do believe based on what we are seeing that we are very nearly ready to ease things however. Its a tough decision though

is_that_so

Speakerboxx wrote: »

It hardly is that either if you ask me.

Most of us would say no it isn't to every post of yes it is. The vast majority have respected it.

KrustyUCC

Speakerboxx wrote: »

It hardly is that either if you ask me.

What % would you put it that are non compliant?

kwestfan08

Deleted User wrote: »

Economies will recover. Dead people wont

Recession hit economies cause untold misery for the people unlikely enough to be hit hardest by them.

[Deleted User]

growleaves wrote: »

I've adhered to the rules but I refuse to burn incense to the cruel gods of lockdown.

Phantom projections have already been shown to be false and quietly retracted. I'm not going to praise the lockdown gods for banishing these phantoms.

Unless someone has a personal interest in being holed up in their dwelling they should be demanding extraordinary proof after this is over to establish how effective the lockdown was.

Because the once the lockdown is over the only interest you might have in defending it as such is because you don't want to admit you were wrong or change your emotional landscape. (Or maybe you are a government supporter or because "other countries" did it too and "other countries" are never wrong.)

If you can show me where the models were retracted, not amended based on new facts, including the restrictions put in place, but retracted, I will agree with you

boring accountant

[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.

I wish people would stop downplaying the severity of putting innocent, law abiding citizens under arbitrary house arrest for 6 weeks, making them queue up for food and generally treating all citizens the same as convicted criminals with NO evidence to support to effectiveness of such policies only mathematical models based on flawed assumptions.

Speakerboxx

KrustyUCC wrote: »

What % would you put it that are non compliant?

30-40%

tobefrank321

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Just now on BBC there's a widow speaking who lost her husband who died in ICU beside his brother. Both in their 50's.
She pleaded with people to stop disobeying the stay at home recommendations, people to stop going to parks, having parties and barbecues.
So many are thinking now "ah sure, I don't know anyone around me who's gotten it" that they are returning to old habits.

I'm guessing both had underlying conditions. Locking down society indefinitely is not the answer here. A more targeted approach at those most at risk would be better. Otherwise we continually lift and impose restrictions on the majority of healthy people which is a very blunt instrument in dealing with this. We know the impact of this virus on the vast majority of healthy people is mild and even asymptomatic. Its impact on those with underlying conditions is much more severe and they need to be targeted better for protection and cocooning.

Hooked

Deleted User wrote: »

Very basic: Essentially money is the confidence people have that it has value. A central bank can issue debt to create the money - i.e a line item on a balance sheet someone. Someone else, usually a bank can then take that debt and pass it on as loans. As long as there is someone to pay pack the loans at some point the money is liquid - has value. The big risk is if you issue too much, the value will fall and confidence will be lost. As an engineer I don't understand much beyond that

Nah, I'm still lost. Economics is not my strong suit.

Back to my iMac... and pretty design files.

Penfailed

Gael23 wrote: »

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

Game? What game?

I know a fella in his 80s that has been offered to have his shopping done for him but he's trying to maintain his independence. He has already lost a brother to Covid. He's socially distancing but still going out for walks (lives in a rural location).

boring accountant

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Economies will recover. Dead people wont

History has shown that economic collapse can lead to war, famine and genocide. 2008 was frankly an aberration in terms of how peaceful our response was. The world of 2020 is far more divided.

The strength of the world economy might have been the only thing preventing armies from going on the march this year, now we’re going to find out.

Hooked

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Just now on BBC there's a widow speaking who lost her husband who died in ICU beside his brother. Both in their 50's.
She pleaded with people to stop disobeying the stay at home recommendations, people to stop going to parks, having parties and barbecues.
So many are thinking now "ah sure, I don't know anyone around me who's gotten it" that they are returning to old habits.

Both in their 50s.... BUT what else??? Heart issues? Asthma? Smokers?

Just because they were "young-ish" doesn't mean the Covid-19 wasn't fückîng with 2 lads with the lungs of 80 year olds...

The median age of lab reported deaths is 83!!!
And nearly half of them are from bloody care homes!
https://www.gov.ie/en/news/7e0924-latest-updates-on-covid-19-coronavirus/#latest-charts-and-maps

Penfailed

Speakerboxx wrote: »

30-40%

Goose76

From Irish Times today:

''Cocooning is also expected to last for the foreseeable future, until vaccines or treatments for Covid-19 are found.''

so the over 70s are expected to live the rest of their lives indoors, with just a bit of exercise each day? Am I reading this correctly? Thoughts?

KrustyUCC

Speakerboxx wrote: »

30-40%

Wow that high

That's a shock to Leo, Holohan and the guards that numbers would be that high

Very impressive that community transmission is as low as it is

Stark

Goose76 wrote: »

From Irish Times today:

''Cocooning is also expected to last for the foreseeable future, until vaccines or treatments for Covid-19 are found.''

so the over 70s are expected to live the rest of their lives indoors, with just a bit of exercise each day? Am I reading this correctly? Thoughts?

Who said they were going to be allowed exercise? :pac:

Spencer Brown

Speakerboxx wrote: »

30-40%

:rolleyes: FFS cop on

growleaves

If you can show me where the models were retracted, not amended based on new facts, including the restrictions put in place, but retracted, I will agree with you

There was never an official retraction, just a drastic revision downward of numbers.

I linked a post in a reply to you above that gives a summary.

Surely you agree with me that the assumptions and efficacy of these lockdowns should be investigated by scientists either way? In fact they definitely will be so the only choice will be whether or not people pay attention to that or choose to say they've 'moved on' either to some new crisis or something else.

[Deleted User]

Its really naive to think that we don't let people die/suffer every day to protect the economy. Of course we do. There's many illnesses that don't get the funding they realistically need. Its not that we're cold heartless people. We just can't always afford for 100 people to suffer to help 1.
I can think of many examples but I won't get bogged down in the details.

The same is going to apply to Covid 19. We can't lockdown for long periods of time just to try keep a few more people alive. We've worked hard for decades to have the kind of quality of life we enjoy in 2020. We can't throw that all away.

And if the economy fails, we've no money to help anybody anyways.

Keep that in mind next time you feel tempted to post something like "Even 1 life is more important than the economy"