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

Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

fortwilliam

Aaaaaaaah ballax!

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2020/0715/1153499-politics-cabinet/

I get it, I really do, but why the focus on pubs?
I got a haircut today in the Grafton Barber where a nice barber cut my hair with no social distancing (Completely within guidance)
I just don't get the focus on the boozer...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

sydthebeat

BPKS wrote: »

You missed my point.

What is the difference between people spending 4 hours together in the same company in a pub or 2 hours in a pub and another 2 hours in the same house after?

Cos that's whats going on now.

there is a very distinct lack of awareness in this post.
how can you not see the glaring difference?

its not about them infecting themselves, its about affecting others.

of course they come in contact with less people if they are drinking themselves at home.

Jackman25

KiKi III wrote: »

Fair enough, here’s what’s happening in Spain: https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-new-cases-force-160-000-back-into-localised-lockdown-in-spain-12029108

Where does it say that the localized lockdown was due to pubs?

crisco10

BPKS wrote: »

You missed my point.

What is the difference between people spending 4 hours together in the same company in a pub or 2 hours in a pub and another 2 hours in the same house after?

Cos that's whats going on now.

In the latter 2 hours in the house, they won't share any surfaces/toilets/space with anybody else outside the group?

almostover

BPKS wrote: »

You missed my point.

What is the difference between people spending 4 hours together in the same company in a pub or 2 hours in a pub and another 2 hours in the same house after?

Cos that's whats going on now.

Because they are doubling their exposure duration to other people by not going home after 2 hours in the pub. Plus they will be drunker in the company of others and less likely to social distance. This is simple stuff. The longer you are indoors with people from outside your usual contact group the greater risk you have of contracting COVID-19. And conversely the greater risk you have of spreading COVID-19 to others in the case where you may be asymptomatic.

sydthebeat

ixoy wrote: »

So if there's a small cluster the other side of Dublin from me, in one electoral district, due to some idiots having a house party - something you won't be able to stop - you lock down the entire county? It needs to be a nuanced approach.

if that small cluster leads to larger community transmission, then of course obviously.

at the moment small cluster infections leading to community transmission is lead to restrictions to THE WHOLE COUNTRY

of course it should be regionalised.

how they do that is up to the enforcers, but they were able to check for non essential travel a month ago... so they can do it again now, as its easier as the scale is less.

KiKi III

Pentecost wrote: »

I like to think I'm somewhere in the middle on this argument but that is apples and oranges. Europe is a much fairer comparison.

Fair enough, here’s what’s happening in Spain: https://www.google.ie/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-new-cases-force-160-000-back-into-localised-lockdown-in-spain-12029108

BPKS

almostover wrote: »

Duration of exposure to a COVID-19 positive person increases the risk of contracting it. It's simple. That why a limit has been put on eating out, to minimise risk. What you're saying is like putting your hand in a fire for 1 sec or for 10mins will result in the same burning.

People are looking for excuses constantly to flout the guidelines. Grow up and be responsible.

You missed my point.

What is the difference between people spending 4 hours together in the same company in a pub or 2 hours in a pub and another 2 hours in the same house after?

Cos that's whats going on now.

hotmail.com

Leo strongly hinting that the rest of the pubs won't reopen on August 10th.

Huntergonzo

Government just flexing their muscles here, be safer if all pubs were open rather than just 'restaurants'.

Open all or close all, this is just bóllóx

Pentecost

Hurrache wrote: »

I don't think it's apples and oranges. The bar scene in the US cities is more comparable to the pub scene here, than the Irish pub scene with cafes and bars across the continent.

The level of cases when opening up again is what I meant. I agree with you in terms of your point.

Utopia Parkway

whippet wrote: »

all along the re-opening was supposed to be based on the prevalent R-0 number and keeping that below 1. So in effect we are still on the same original plan - however as long at the R is over one and closer to 2 the chance of pubs being opened is minimal.

That's OK but the R number is not very accurate when cases are so low. Basically cases can be going down and the R number can still rise.

almostover

hmmm wrote: »

The policy is to follow the science. We don't know enough about the virus to say exactly what measures slow it down or speed it up, so the government has to be very careful how much fuel they feed.

We know that indoor settings are more dangerous than outdoors. We know that talking, particularly loud talking (e.g. singing) is more dangerous than quiet. We know that alcohol leads to reduced social distancing. It doesn't take much to figure out that a busy pub (not a restaurant or a pub-restaurant) is relatively high-risk.

My god where are you going with facts and common sense on an internet forum??? Do you not know how this works? Just blame the government like everyone else and you'll fair much better!

whippet

all along the re-opening was supposed to be based on the prevalent R-0 number and keeping that below 1. So in effect we are still on the same original plan - however as long at the R is over one and closer to 2 the chance of pubs being opened is minimal.

Society at large are the people who control the R number and with the phases of opening so far we don't seem to be doing a good job of it.

I can anecdotally say that about 50% of the people that I know are behaving as if the pandemic was over - while about half of the rest are sort of following the guidelines.

I love a pint as much as the next man - however; I enjoy a pint when I can walk in to my local, sit at the bar and talk rubbish to who ever walks in the door. I have very little interest in booking a table, ordering food and having a pint .. has no appeal to me.

I miss the pub and the social interaction but until I can actually enjoy it I have no interest in going back to one. As for drinking at home - it never appealed to me so I've been practically tee total since the end of Feb !

Hurrache

Pentecost wrote: »

I like to think I'm somewhere in the middle on this argument but that is apples and oranges. Europe is a much fairer comparison.

I don't think it's apples and oranges. The bar scene in the US cities is more comparable to the pub scene here, than the Irish pub scene with cafes and bars across the continent.

Pentecost

KiKi III wrote: »

People who are in a rush to reopen: I know you have access to the internet because you’re on Boards. Google what’s going on in the US right now.

I like to think I'm somewhere in the middle on this argument but that is apples and oranges. Europe is a much fairer comparison.

almostover

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Friends of mine booked a table last weekend. Ate at around 7 and drank until after midnight.

Rural pub.

Friend of mine spent 5 hours in a city centre pub in Cork last week for Brunch. Gang of them drank their weight in wine, the VFI can blame their own members who have the facilities to serve food for flouting the rules.

As for the rest of us we've only ourselves to blame. Nothing stopping us leaving after 105mins even if the service of drink is allowed to continue. It's easier to blame the government though

KiKi III

People who are in a rush to reopen: I know you have access to the internet because you’re on Boards. Google what’s going on in the US right now.

is_that_so

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Yeah I don't see it happening either unless the numbers for the virus somehow drop magically which doesn't seem likely to happen.

It'll be the usual wait 3 weeks till we see the measures ...

Utopia Parkway

Bit cynical wrote: »

I can't see what is going to happen between now and 10th August that would allow pubs to open on that date if they are not deemed fit to open now.

Yeah I don't see it happening either unless the numbers for the virus somehow drop magically which doesn't seem likely to happen.

almostover

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Some people do, some people don't. It's all about personal choice and it's not up to health Quangos and NGOs to interfere in our personal choices. They have the right to advise but not enforce things upon us. They have no mandate, they have not been elected by anybody.

It is their mandate when our A&Es are clogged up every weekend with drunks. And our Gardai have to spend their time stopping drink driving TDs.

Bit cynical

I can't see what is going to happen between now and 10th August that would allow pubs to open on that date if they are not deemed fit to open now.

Strumms

Neowise wrote: »

How can charging €30 for a 6 pack of guinness, up from €12, be described as 'went up a few quid'.

Do you ever buy cans yourself or do you just want those who do to suffer with their wallets?

It’s a 150% price increase... so just a rip off in other words.

almostover

BPKS wrote: »

Yes - instead they should have left the pub at 9 o clock and all gone back to the same house to continue drinking.

Duration of exposure to a COVID-19 positive person increases the risk of contracting it. It's simple. That why a limit has been put on eating out, to minimise risk. What you're saying is like putting your hand in a fire for 1 sec or for 10mins will result in the same burning.

People are looking for excuses constantly to flout the guidelines. Grow up and be responsible.

Neowise

PhilOssophy wrote: »

If house parties are the problem, then add about €3 tax to every can of beer and similar increases by the strength of the drink to every other alcoholic product sold in a supermarket. It'd help the government get a lot of their €350 back if this summer has just descended into a 3-month party.

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Many more would just switch to "cheaper, illegal drugs" just because the price of alcohol went up by a few quid? Really, really doubt that myself. I think about 18-25 year old me, I certainly wouldn't have moved on to harder stuff just because the price of drink went up (and if I had, I'd be dead by now because the price of drink went up consistently during that period!)

How can charging €30 for a 6 pack of guinness, up from €12, be described as 'went up a few quid'.

Do you ever buy cans yourself or do you just want those who do to suffer with their wallets?

Strumms

lertsnim wrote: »

Padraig Cribben of the VFI on Newstalk this morning calling for the ban of alcohol sales in supermarkets to stop house parties so pubs can eventually open.

So this fella is advocating ‘banning’ the sale of alcohol in supermarkets , in the democracy that is the Republic of Ireland , so that people who want alcohol have no option anymore to enjoy said drinks in the peace, quiet and safety of their own living room during a pandemic , they have to go out to a pub when they open ?

This chump needs a fast reminder that this is a fuçking democracy, not North Korea, neither he or his mob are going to have legislators and politicians help him hold a gun to the heads of the ordinary citizens. He and his mob can go fûck themselves, absolute scoundrel of the highest order. He isn’t concerned about house parties he is concerned for the tills in pubs not ringing as often or as loud.

PhilOssophy

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Oh great, collective punishment. :rolleyes:

Well I wouldn't pay it, I'd start home brewing, and look into home distilling. Many others would too and some would start selling bootleg booze. Many more would just switch to cheaper, illegal drugs.

In short, your suggestion is both unjust and completely counterproductive.

Don't brew too much, it was intended as a short term measure but whatever!
I'm not sure the market for cheap slop brewed by some chancer is as hot as you'd expect....but you work away and let us know how you get on!

Many more would just switch to "cheaper, illegal drugs" just because the price of alcohol went up by a few quid? Really, really doubt that myself. I think about 18-25 year old me, I certainly wouldn't have moved on to harder stuff just because the price of drink went up (and if I had, I'd be dead by now because the price of drink went up consistently during that period!)

SAMTALK

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

The last few months have really rammed home just how stupid some people are. She should be keeping her distance from everybody. If she still doesn't understand that...

This is the bottom line really. Stupid people who just don't think .

The amount of people going into shops and not using gel on hands is unreal
Common courtesy really. For yourself and others as well.

People whinging about the government and the rules / lack of rules while at the same time wont do the basics
Why can't people think for themselves and work out to stay back from people, wash hands, sanitize , cough/sneeze into arm, use a mask in crowded places.

If everyone followed the basics it would help greatly.

hmmm

Tenzor07 wrote: »

Well, what you're basically saying is that without a vaccine the pubs/nightclubs should remain closed...

Nightclubs will not reopen before a vaccine in my view.

Pubs at best can reopen in a very limited way.

I don't get the impression people realise this and many expect pubs to go back to "normal", so government are stuck. Pubs are important to the country, but there is no obvious way to reopen them safely.

BPKS

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Friends of mine booked a table last weekend. Ate at around 7 and drank until after midnight.

Rural pub.

Yes - instead they should have left the pub at 9 o clock and all gone back to the same house to continue drinking.

Tenzor07

hmmm wrote: »

The policy is to follow the science. We don't know enough about the virus to say exactly what measures slow it down or speed it up, so the government has to be very careful how much fuel they feed.
We know that indoor settings are more dangerous than outdoors. We know that talking, particularly loud talking (e.g. singing) is more dangerous than quiet. We know that alcohol leads to reduced social distancing. It doesn't take much to figure out that a busy pub (not a restaurant or a pub-restaurant) is relatively high-risk.

Well, what you're basically saying is that without a vaccine the pubs/nightclubs should remain closed...