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

Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

Options
1…147148150152153…251

Comments

  • Options
    #4472
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,277 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Absolutely agree, but the way they're choosing the 'ahh well' demographics suggests that they're not too confident in Pfizer's own testing.

    on what basis do you think they are setting the priorities? Be specific.


  • Options
    #4473
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    A 70 year old might have another 20 years ahead of them, a terminally ill 40 year old might have 12 months. That 40-year-old might spend half of the rest of their life isolating if they're only waiting six months for the vaccine.


    I get that but still.....

    There was grumblings over in the UK about the hospital figures and deaths. As one doctor put it most of the very ill patients that died from C19 would have died by August anyway rather than March/April.

    I know it's not popular but part of me thinks: Let nature take it's course.

    I have spoken to a few 80+ year olds including my 86 yr old g/mother and their attitude is "Fcuk it. I am not spending the little time I have left living in fear especially when the 20 year olds are bring screwed over." Just saying.


  • Options
    #4474
    Antares35
    Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    partyguinness wrote: »
    I get that but still.....

    There was grumblings over in the UK about the hospital figures and deaths. As one doctor put it most of the very ill patients that died from C19 would have died by August anyway rather than March/April.

    I know it's not popular but part of me thinks: Let nature take it's course.

    I have spoken to a few 80+ year olds including my 86 yr old g/mother and their attitude is "Fcuk it. I am not spending the little time I have left living in fear especially when the 20 year olds are bring screwed over." Just saying.

    Since we're indulging anecdotal evidence, I've spoken to elderly people, my own parents included, who would rather ride out the storm in safety and look forward to the many years they hope they have left. Just saying.


  • Options
    #4475
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Antares35 wrote: »
    Since we're indulging anecdotal evidence, I've spoken to elderly people, my own parents included, who would rather ride out the storm in safety and look forward to the many years they hope they have left. Just saying.


    Of course it is ancedotal. 90% of the posts across the entire forum are ancedotal.


  • Options
    #4476
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Just heard the news that vaccines are being prioritised for the terminally ill...I am already unimpressed that the over 80s are being prioritised.

    But now the terminally ill...why??


    Can't be a large demographic and if prioritising them can help prolong or improve their time then why not - it's not like it's going to make any huge impact on the rest of the roll out.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4477
    partyguinness
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Can't be a large demographic and if prioritising them can help prolong or improve their time then why not - it's not like it's going to make any huge impact on the rest of the roll out.


    Yeah that's a fair enough observation...small numbers and can double up as guinea pigs.


  • Options
    #4478
    Antares35
    Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Of course it is ancedotal. 90% of the posts across the entire forum are ancedotal.

    Did I disagree with you that it's anecdotal? 90 percent of the posts are also fighting with themselves.


  • Options
    #4479
    SuperSean11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,555 ✭✭✭SuperSean11


    Lack of education and many other factors


  • Options
    #4480
    Antares35
    Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    Nick Biddle wrote: »
    The parents of the African children with flies crawling on their face that you see on charity ads should be ashamed of themselves.

    If you know that your children would be brought into a world of poverty, misery and suffering then you shouldn't be having sex.

    A lot of the time the women (who might also be minors themselves) might not actually have a say in the matter.


  • Options
    #4481
    Lollipops23
    Registered Users Posts: 5,420 ✭✭✭Lollipops23


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Just heard the news that vaccines are being prioritised for the terminally ill...I am already unimpressed that the over 80s are being prioritised.

    But now the terminally ill...why??

    Because it's not up to us to determine how these people pass.

    Peacefully, pain managed and surrounded by loved ones?

    Or gasping for breath with an iPad beside them to say goodbye to their spouse of 50 years?

    I know what I'd choose.

    Edited to add: I am double high risk and haven't hugged my mother in months.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4482
    eoferrall
    Registered Users Posts: 2,542 ✭✭✭eoferrall


    Lollipops23 wrote: »
    Of course not- but children are of often the only contribution women can make there.

    Also, it is like a pension, the children look after the old parents etc. if they have no kids they have no one to look after them when they can't do it. also why the poorest have many children, in the crudest terms its a numbers game that a certain proportion will not survive to adulthood etc.

    It is a very complex issue and can not be simplified that if they can not afford it then they should not have kids.


  • Options
    #4483
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,039 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    partyguinness wrote: »
    Just heard the news that vaccines are being prioritised for the terminally ill...I am already unimpressed that the over 80s are being prioritised.

    But now the terminally ill...why??

    So they can spend time with their family and friends before they die. End of life is a part of life too. I'm fine with this move. I doubt there are enough terminally ill people to make much of a difference to the rollout but it can make a big difference to those people. I'm fine with it.


  • Options
    #4484
    castletownman
    Registered Users Posts: 11,111 ✭✭✭✭castletownman


    I think when the vaccine is readily available, and we have the hierarchy so to spoke of who gets it first, then those in the at-risk categories should be the only ones that have to cocoon/isolate/work from home (whichever is applicable). Let everyone else get back to normality and open up the economy now that there is an end-game in sight.

    At the end of the day too, it comes down to personal responsibility, something that seems to be ignored by the government who just want to wrap everyone in cotton wool. Like, how many older people completely ignore the advice of their doctor to continue enjoying their cigarettes or alcohol or fatty foods? At the same time, if someone was given a second chance with a new organ, but ended up back seriously ill by not changing their habits, should we as a society be held collectively responsible or punished by their misadventure?


  • Options
    #4485
    Lollipops23
    Registered Users Posts: 5,420 ✭✭✭Lollipops23


    castletownman wrote: »
    I think when the vaccine is readily available, and we have the hierarchy so to spoke of who gets it first, then those in the at-risk categories should be the only ones that have to cocoon/isolate/work from home (whichever is applicable). Let everyone else get back to normality and open up the economy now that there is an end-game in sight.

    At the end of the day too, it comes down to personal responsibility, something that seems to be ignored by the government who just want to wrap everyone in cotton wool. Like, how many older people completely ignore the advice of their doctor to continue enjoying their cigarettes or alcohol or fatty foods? At the same time, if someone was given a second chance with a new organ, but ended up back seriously ill by not changing their habits, should we as a society be held collectively responsible or punished by their misadventure?

    So because I have MS, despite working full time in an office job with a team I really enjoy being around, despite having a large loving family, despite the fact that I am getting married next year and despite being only 33, I should just shut up and lock myself in my house for another 9 months?

    I want the vaccine as soon as I possibly can- because I love my life and I also would most likely suffer gravely if I catch the virus.


  • Options
    #4486
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    castletownman wrote: »
    I think when the vaccine is readily available, and we have the hierarchy so to spoke of who gets it first, then those in the at-risk categories should be the only ones that have to cocoon/isolate/work from home

    Logically, they should be the first, no?


  • Options
    #4487
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Lollipops23 wrote: »
    So because I have MS, despite working full time in an office job with a team I really enjoy being around, despite having a large loving family, despite the fact that I am getting married next year and despite being only 33, I should just shut up and lock myself in my house for another 9 months?

    I want the vaccine as soon as I possibly can- because I love my life and I also would most likely suffer gravely if I catch the virus.

    Don’t listen to the weirdos you’re a ****ing warrior!


  • Options
    #4488
    dzsfah2xoynme9
    Closed Accounts Posts: 326 ✭✭dzsfah2xoynme9


    I think tea is disgusting..


  • Options
    #4489
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    A 70 year old might have another 20 years ahead of them, a terminally ill 40 year old might have 12 months. That 40-year-old might spend half of the rest of their life isolating if they're only waiting six months for the vaccine.

    The world must however keep turning.
    In my book it should realistically be

    Workers who are at high risk (pre existing etc... working from youngest to oldest)
    Workers who are in contact with high risk (medical staff, carers etc..)
    General Working Population
    disabled people (working youngest to oldest)
    Retired People
    Students and children.
    The unemployed.
    Those in DP.


  • Options
    #4490
    castletownman
    Registered Users Posts: 11,111 ✭✭✭✭castletownman


    MikeOxsgreen wrote: »
    Logically, they should be the first, no?

    Thats my point. They'll be the first to get it so in theory would have the shortest amount of time to isolate etc. No point continuing to keep the fit and healthy under lockdown for the longest and allowing the economy to tank further.

    I emphatise with the previous poster but in that situation at least they'd be prioritised and in theory would be back to normality faster than most of the general populace.

    I genuinely didn't mean to cause upset though. Must be an unpopular opinion so.


  • Options
    #4491
    Antares35
    Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    The world must however keep turning.
    In my book it should realistically be

    Workers who are at high risk (pre existing etc... working from youngest to oldest)
    Workers who are in contact with high risk (medical staff, carers etc..)
    General Working Population
    disabled people (working youngest to oldest)
    Retired People
    Students and children.
    The unemployed.
    Those in DP.
    DP as in direct provision? Are these people not more at risk because they are forced to share communal cooking and leisure facilities, thereby making social distancing practically impossible? Are people on your list ranked in terms of their perceived value rather than vulnerability?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4492
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,277 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Antares35 wrote: »
    DP as in direct provision? Are these people not more at risk because they are forced to share communal cooking and leisure facilities, thereby making social distancing practically impossible? Are people on your list ranked in terms of their perceived value rather than vulnerability?

    given erics opinion of those in DP it is no surprise he puts them at the bottom of the list


  • Options
    #4493
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    given erics opinion of those in DP it is no surprise he puts them at the bottom of the list

    its the only fair place to put them in almost any regard - housing, welfare, vaccines, medical care etc.. Look after citizens first.


  • Options
    #4494
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 20,039 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    The world must however keep turning.
    In my book it should realistically be

    Workers who are at high risk (pre existing etc... working from youngest to oldest)
    Workers who are in contact with high risk (medical staff, carers etc..)
    General Working Population
    disabled people (working youngest to oldest)
    Retired People
    Students and children.
    The unemployed.
    Those in DP.

    You’re looking at it the wrong way around. You don’t need to vaccinate the working population to send them out to work. We need to vaccinate most vulnerable so they don’t take up hospital spaces and die when they get it. The healthy people will be encouraged go out to work and loads will get covid. But they are much less likely to need hospital care or die. So it’s not as bad as the vulnerable and old getting it.

    The strategy of starting by vaccinating the most likely to be seriously sick and die, is sound.

    Have you heard anyone say they even plan to vaccinate the young and healthy? I don’t think that’s the plan at the moment.

    Edit: second look at your list suggests you’re just being an edge lord


  • Options
    #4495
    99nsr125
    Registered Users Posts: 1,183 ✭✭✭99nsr125


    I think we should vaccinate

    The politicians first

    - If they make it the country is safe
    - if they don't, the country is still safe :-)


  • Options
    #4496
    growleaves
    Registered Users Posts: 7,724 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Most people are immersed in lies on a near-constant basis - especially treating PR/spin/corporate baby talk/woke baby talk as if it had *any* validity - and are more corrupt and degraded than they consciously realise.

    Most people's thoughts are evil most of the time. They aren't motivated to tell the truth or seek the good (specious politicised definitions of goodness don't count - just more lies).

    We have melded Western societies with the Communist world over the last 15 years, but especially this year in 2020.


  • Options
    #4497
    vriesmays
    Registered Users Posts: 1,570 ✭✭✭vriesmays


    The Covid scare is socially constructed. If this was the 1980s there would be no lockdown. It's because of the times we're in, the minority rule and everyone else obeys.


  • Options
    #4498
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,929 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    vriesmays wrote: »
    The Covid scare is socially constructed. If this was the 1980s there would be no lockdown. It's because of the times we're in, the minority rule and everyone else obeys.

    No it isn’t


  • Options
    #4499
    Antares35
    Registered Users Posts: 3,845 ✭✭✭Antares35


    Whenever I see a children's book and it has an author and artist printed on it, I always think that it's actually not that much of an achievement to write a children's book, but it is to illustrate it.


  • Options
    #4500
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    growleaves wrote: »
    Most people's thoughts are evil most of the time. They aren't motivated to tell the truth or seek the good (specious politicised definitions of goodness don't count - just more lies).

    If you believe most people around you are mostly driven by evil intentions, you are paranoid.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4501
    growleaves
    Registered Users Posts: 7,724 ✭✭✭growleaves


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If you believe most people around you are mostly driven by evil intentions, you are paranoid.

    I didn't say that most people around me are driven by evil intentions.

    I said that most people's thoughts are evil most of the time.


Advertisement