SEPT 23 1989 wrote: » The people who make these decisions dont spend time drinking pints in pubs They hate them
Coillte_Bhoy wrote: » What about only 8 but from 5 different households? Its a pile of nonsense at this stage, i can see the rationale behind the guidelines but its unenforceable and nobody is taking it seriously anymore
Utopia Parkway wrote: » There is undoubtably a big pub culture in Ireland. However there is also a not insignificant anti-pub element who would close all the pubs tomorrow if they could. Virus or no virus.
Poorside wrote: » And who is going to actually police that? Guards come to your door, you don't have to let them in without a warrant.
Fann Linn wrote: » Some Professor said that earlier; 'love to know how you're safer in a pub by buying a €9 sandwich as opposed to one who doesnt? ' They should be all shut or all open.
boombang wrote: » I support this. Was out in a restaurant with the in laws on Sunday. Some well meaning acquaintance comes up, buckled, hugs and kisses half of our group, shakes hands with the other. I know it's just because he was pissed, but there's nothing we could do but smile awkwardly. There's no telling drunk people. We'll not be back to pubs or restaurants in a while after that experience. Drink and COVID don't mix.
Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: » People in other countries obey rules and wear masks. Not the Irish though. Rules don't suit the Irish.
Mortelaro wrote: » Theres a pub in Cornwall thats installed an electric fence to police social distancing, I kid you nothttps://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-53389977
Risteard81 wrote: » There won't be a surge because the so-called disease simply isn't here. The State has no right to shut any business or to tell people how to live their lives.
rubadub wrote: » That "anti-pub element" may include general people against recreational addictive drugs, or indeed those against all recreational drugs including non addictive ones. There could also be others (like myself who drinks heavily) who would love to just see the pathetic hypocrites suffer for shits n giggles even though I would suffer myself. Not just pubs closing but any outlet selling recreational drugs that might lead to loss of inhibitions that may lead to greater risk. The amount of sad idiots who still make out like they do not understand the meal rules is pathetic "durrr, I'm a stoopid ignorant moroooon, what difference does eating make", you're fooling nobody, and I am genuinely feeling pity if you genuinely are that stupid. Unable to realise why laws are already in place in restaurants or for pubs with children. Some seem to think they look smart if they pretend to be idiotic ignorant cunts, I still don't get it.
ablelocks wrote: » it's a good thing - from what I've seen, social distancing is not happening effectively in shops or restaurants. Not at the beach or on the streets. Not at all in sports training I'm involved in or by supporters at the challenge matches I've been to. There isn't a hope in hell that a pub can operate and not be a focal point for COVID 19. Think about it - the people who are getting out and about as it is aren't doing what they're supposed to do. If the pub's reopened on Monday, it would coincide with the restart of most GAA (and other sports) matches. So on the weekend of the 25th, people will go to a match, congregate in the ground, roar and shout and then go to the pub! If Covid could talk this is what it would ask for - a perfect opportunity to reset and tear into us again. Look at the evidence from around the world in countries that have eased their lockdowns. I love going to the pub (or used to) but this is just asking for our hospitals to be overloaded again and all our efforts over the last 5 months will have been in vain.
Richard Hillman wrote: » Simon Harris and Varadker were on an absolute mission to try and end the drinking culture in Ireland over the last 4 years. They have been constantly lobbied by health Quangos and NGOs to go after alcohol. NPHET is run pretty much entirely by health professionals who no doubtedly have links or are apart of the anti-alcohol lobby. This is their golden ticket. It is 100% an anti-alcohol thing.
The chan chan man wrote: » My €2.5k “staycation” (shudder..) will be some craic so..
almostover wrote: » Would you be willing to admit that we have an unhealthy relationship with alcohol in this country?
Dempo1 wrote: » Trying to get my head around Michael Martins assertion "I hope the TWSS extension will help" I'm assuming a vast majority of pubs currently closed have temporarily laid off staff, equally with zero revenues the prudent decision would have been for staff to go on the PUP so I'd doubt very much any extension of TWSS is of any benifit to publicans or staff affected. The government seem hell bent on either ending PUP or certainly reducing it but at the same time happy it seems to pay up to 75% of payroll for business's shut and it likely TWSS costing far more. I get the concept but surely are they not the same. I also get expenses, losses etc but they are separate issues. It's seems statistically TWSS more palatable than PUP So PUP = €350 PW unless reduced to €203 pw TWSS = €2800 PM average PM but mostly higher. Both essentially doing the same thing, maintaining income for those laid off. (Although businesses back trading can continue to claim TWSS to cover most of payroll) Surely TWSS should be aimed at those who have returned to work and PUP maintained and Aimed at those currently laid off. Businesses currently back trading as normal and still availing of TWSS is another story
Fann Linn wrote: » Some businesses never closed, are making profits and are still claiming this payment for their employees.
