Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - Read OP for Mod Warnings

Cyrus · 08-11-2020 08:01PM

charlie14 wrote: »

How does everyone know this ?
We know from the first wave that the deaths rate to confirmed cases is not known for up to 6 to 8 weeks afterwards.
You cannot equate any given days deaths to that days confirmed cases.

There isn’t a serious academic study in the world that has the mortality rate anywhere close to 3 percent

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:03PM

nofools wrote: »

Exactly, it won't. The damage has been done already, more to come if the turkeys keep voting for it.

The world won't stop and there will be cash in the atms still.

What do you mean turkeys voting for Christmas? Are you being intentionally vague here?

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:05PM

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

How's our economy going to bounce back to what it was when the entire country's been locked up for months at a time?

Because everybody is in the same boat. During the last lockdown our GDP was better than the majority of European countries (even the one that didn`t use lockdown was 40% worse) and our income tax returns were actually down very little.

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:09PM

Cyrus wrote: »

There isn’t a serious academic study in the world that has the mortality rate anywhere close to 3 percent

As I have already pointed out to another poster I did not say our mortality rate was 3%.
I said the percentage of deaths here in the first wave was over 3% to CONFIRMED cases and was 6% where a country did not use lockdown

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:09PM

charlie14 wrote: »

Because everybody is in the same boat. During the last lockdown our GDP was better than the majority of European countries (even the one that didn`t use lockdown was 40% worse) and our income tax returns were actually down very little.

I don't see what everyone being in the same boat has to do with that. Our economy is still ****ed

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:12PM

charlie14 wrote: »

As I have already pointed out to another poster I did not say our mortality rate was 3%.
I said the percentage of deaths here in the first wave was over 3% to CONFIRMED cases and was 6% where a country did not use lockdown

But confirmed vs what it actually is are completely different. WHO reckon over 700 million people have had covid. Are 21 million of them dead?

CalamariFritti · 08-11-2020 08:13PM

charlie14 wrote: »

It`s actually very simple as I`ve attempted to explain to you already.
We can all ignore statistics and guess our own numbers, but that`s not debate or even logical.

It`s the equivalent of two bald men arguing over a comb.

We are not guessing our own numbers. Well I'm not anyway.

There is a set of numbers from the first wave.
There is a set of numbers from the second wave.

Which one do you think is closer to the truth?

end of the road · 08-11-2020 08:15PM

Akesh wrote: »

It makes it even worse for the government that more and more people are losing confidence day-by-day. NPHET have burned through almost all of the initial goodwill built up bar the odd minority of society cheering on lockdowns, the majority of people can see the measures to date have failed and aren't working.

this is not born out by the evidence, for which all of the evidence is showing that support for the measures is still around the same numbers as it has always been.
the majority of us do see that the measures are mostly working, most of us know that instant results aren't possible to deliver.

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

€23 billion euro deficit yep nothing to worry about economy wise

nobody said it was nothing to worry about, what was said was the fear is disproportionate at the moment given the current pandemic would have lead to economic damage regardless.

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

Yeah but they get to work from home in their pyjamas so it's worth the cost

working from home and more is eventually going to grow, covid has simply hastened changes that were coming anyway longer term meaning people haven't had the time required to adapt that they would have had with the normal pace of change, meaning that the change wouldn't have been problematic for them as they would just slowly adapt.
the high street has slowly been declining, businesses have been adapting to the online world, banking is increasingly moving to online with branch closures slowly happening, the pub trade has been declining.
wouldn't be surprised if we see a lot of restauranters moving to online deliveries and take away long term, same with pubs. less over heads and probably increased demand actually due to convenience.
make no mistake the world is changing, covid has been a massive wake up call to this due to the fact people have had to adapt to those changes extremely quickly.

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:16PM

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

I don't see what everyone being in the same boat has to do with that. Our economy is still ****ed

In a global economy if your economy is suffering less than others (GDP) then that is just how it works.

Cyrus · 08-11-2020 08:18PM

charlie14 wrote: »

As I have already pointed out to another poster I did not say our mortality rate was 3%.
I said the percentage of deaths here in the first wave was over 3% to CONFIRMED cases and was 6% where a country did not use lockdown

That’s an utterly meaningless statistic

Micky 32 · 08-11-2020 08:18PM

nofools wrote: »

And tell me how the hell did you reach that conclusion without knowing me?

You get upset if i call your views ignorant but if you jump to conclusions about people that is the definition of it.

You just want to characterise me for some weak attempt at mocking a stereotype i don't even fit.

Also i backed up all my claims with common sense and logic, i don't need to link to youtube videos or 50 page reports.

Thinly veiled doesn't mean I'm right and you are wrong because i said so (like you like to do) ...it means that your points are easily seen as totally wrong by the majority of reasonable people because your evidence is obviously weak.

Lol trust me i’m not upset at all. I have also asked you to qoute your claim where i supposed to have posted “ i was proud that i wasn’t changing my opinion” despite me not even telling you what my opinion is. I’m still waiting.

Yes you are correct. I don’t know you and you don’t know me like you don’t know the other posters on here either.

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:21PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

We are not guessing our own numbers. Well I'm not anyway.

There is a set of numbers from the first wave.
There is a set of numbers from the second wave.

Which one do you think is closer to the truth?

There is a known stats from the first wave of the ratio of deaths to confirmed numbers.
It is not yet possible to calculate stats for this present wave because we do not know yet the numbers who are now confirmed cases which will pass due to being infected by this second wave.

CalamariFritti · 08-11-2020 08:22PM

Cyrus wrote: »

There isn’t a serious academic study in the world that has the mortality rate anywhere close to 3 percent

The WHO has it at 0.05% for people under 70 and at 0.23% overall.
Thats the best we have right now.

I dont get why some people refuse tho acknowledge that and think they have to beef up that rate through some mental gymnastics.

Are they afraid that knowing the truth will send the wrong message as our CMO put it?

Well if you do you're halfway down into seriously messed up territory.

CalamariFritti · 08-11-2020 08:25PM

charlie14 wrote: »

There is a known stats from the first wave of the ratio of deaths to confirmed numbers.
It is not yet possible to calculate stats for this present wave because we do not know yet the numbers who are now confirmed cases which will pass due to being infected by this second wave.

We do have intermediate numbers. We have numbers from elsewhere. We even have peer reviewed studies published by the WHO.

If you stubbornly insist on 3% to 6% IFR simply because thats what we recorded with our crude tools in April it is difficult to take you seriously.

Penfailed · 08-11-2020 08:25PM

Micky 32 wrote: »

Yes unless the vaccine works ( fingers crossed it does)Covid 19 isn’t going away. There are posters on here that would want us level 5 for the next 30 years if need be. But it seems they lack the ability to work out the cost of it.

Is there? I have yet to see anyone say that.

Micky 32 · 08-11-2020 08:27PM

Penfailed wrote: »

Is there? I have yet to see anyone say that.

Maybe not literally but we’ll say “ as long as it takes” is usually their narrative, it’s a good answer because it covers all bases except the intelligence to work out the costs. But wait sure aren’t we printing money,?

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:28PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

The WHO has it at 0.05% for people under 70 and at 0.23% overall.
Thats the best we have right now.

I dont get why some people refuse tho acknowledge that and think they have to beef up that rate through some mental gymnastics.

Are they afraid that knowing the truth will send the wrong message as our CMO put it?

Well if you do you're halfway down into seriously messed up territory.

But we do not have go into seriously messed up guessing territory to known that in Ireland during the first wave there were over 30 deaths for every thousand confirmed case. Not 1 death for every thousand confirmed cases you guessed at.

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:29PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

The WHO has it at 0.05% for people under 70 and at 0.23% overall.
Thats the best we have right now.

I dont get why some people refuse tho acknowledge that and think they have to beef up that rate through some mental gymnastics.

Are they afraid that knowing the truth will send the wrong message as our CMO put it?

Well if you do you're halfway down into seriously messed up territory.

I've given up. If anyone still believes covid kills 3-6% of all people who get it then I don't know what to say

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:30PM

charlie14 wrote: »

But we do not have go into seriously messed up guessing territory to known that in Ireland during the first wave there were over 30 deaths for every thousand confirmed case. Not 1 death for every thousand confirmed cases you guessed at.

What do you think happened to covid that it's fatality rate has fallen from 3% to 0.25 in the space of 3-4 months?

CalamariFritti · 08-11-2020 08:31PM

charlie14 wrote: »

But we do not have go into seriously messed up guessing territory to known that in Ireland during the first wave there were over 30 deaths for every thousand confirmed case. Not 1 death for every thousand confirmed cases you guessed at.

So whats your point? By now I'm after forgetting where we left off onto that particular avenue.

And I am not guessing at.

end of the road · 08-11-2020 08:31PM

Micky 32 wrote: »

More rubbish. Said poster came on with the narrative “ my way or the highway attitude. Anyone who’s opinion is different to theres is “ thinly veiled” so we can deduce from that “ My opinion only matters”.

Said poster was asked numurous times to back up his claims and never did.

realistically the "claims" he made didn't require him to back them up given they were already backed up by most european countries via their approaches.

Micky 32 wrote: »

Rubbish and more nonsense. I’m finding it hard to believe you are affected badly going by your posts.

it actually doesn't matter whether you believe him or not, he says he has been badly effected therefore he has.
as has been said and i will keep saying it, the idea that agreement or disagreement with restrictions is based on specific income lines is just wishful thinking with nothing to show it.
look, i understand it gives people comfort to think that all people badly effected are a hive mind and all disagree with the restrictions, whereas everyone who agrees with them are a hive mind and aren't effected, but it's just not reality and they are just hurting themselves and making themselves miserable by continuing to believe it.

Penfailed · 08-11-2020 08:34PM

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

How's our economy going to bounce back to what it was when the entire country's been locked up for months at a time?

The same way it bounced back after every other recession?

BeefeaterHat · 08-11-2020 08:36PM

Penfailed wrote: »

The same way it bounced back after every other recession?

Was the unemployment rate ever this high? Also you're ignoring all the emigration, suicides and other suffering other recessions caused to make it sound like some was some easy painless process.

Micky 32 · 08-11-2020 08:40PM

end of the road wrote: »

realistically the "claims" he made didn't require him to back them up given they were already backed up by most european countries via their approaches.

.

Actually it was more aimed at the post he made up claiming i posted something that i didn’t post. But that’s ok.

Micky 32 · 08-11-2020 08:42PM

end of the road wrote: »

it actually doesn't matter whether you believe him or not, he says he has been badly effected therefore he has.
.

Do bear in mind the word anecdotal ( it usually gets a good reminding when it suits on these forums), random internet poster who just joined up. You don’t know his circumstances for sure.

end of the road · 08-11-2020 08:44PM

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

Was the unemployment rate ever this high? Also you're ignoring all the emigration, suicides and other suffering other recessions caused to make it sound like some was some easy painless process.

to be fair a lot of the unemployment currently is just temporary.
so the real unemployment rate is a good bit less and i think is similar to the last recession.

Micky 32 wrote: »

Do bear in mind the word anecdotal ( it usually gets a good reminding when it suits on these forums), random internet poster who just joined up. You don’t know his circumstances for sure.

i'm not claiming to know them, he is telling us what they are.

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:45PM

CalamariFritti wrote: »

We do have intermediate numbers. We have numbers from elsewhere. We even have peer reviewed studies published by the WHO.

If you stubbornly insist on 3% to 6% IFR simply because thats what we recorded with our crude tools in April it is difficult to take you seriously.

I`m not "stubbornly" insisting on anything.
I am simply explaining to you that in Ireland for the first wave our deaths were over 3% for confirmed cases. Not the the 0.1% you claimed.

For Sweden, the darling of some, it was 6% from their own Public Health Authority figures.
If you wish to ignore that it`s up to you. It`s not going to change those statistics.

charlie14 · 08-11-2020 08:49PM

BeefeaterHat wrote: »

What do you think happened to covid that it's fatality rate has fallen from 3% to 0.25 in the space of 3-4 months?

What are you basing this fall from 3% in Ireland to 0.25% on exactly ?

Micky 32 · 08-11-2020 08:50PM

end of the road wrote: »

i'm not claiming to know them, he is telling us what they are.

I know what he is telling and i’m pointing out it’s anecdotal, simple really. You or i don’t really know their circumstances for sure.

CalamariFritti · 08-11-2020 08:59PM

charlie14 wrote: »

I`m not "stubbornly" insisting on anything.
I am simply explaining to you that in Ireland for the first wave our deaths were over 3% for confirmed cases. Not the the 0.1% you claimed.

For Sweden, the darling of some, it was 6% from their own Public Health Authority figures.
If you wish to ignore that it`s up to you. It`s not going to change those statistics.

I did not claim that it was 0.1% of the confirmed case in our first wave. But again you know that.

I think I'm done with you.

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

Comments

Relaxation of Restrictions, Part VI - Read OP for Mod Warnings