mikep wrote: » The reality is that many flaunted or ignored the rules, I personally know families who mixed without any consideration of their own responsibility. One family has 2 vulnerable elderly parents with a stream of children and grandchildren in and out of the house. Including some coming back from abroad. No government could ever have shut the country down completely, which I believe should have been done.. I would have totally cancelled Christmas with a strict lockdown with sanctions for those breaking the rules..
smurgen wrote: » Nope. Vast majority of population supported control measures. Government defied NPHET'S advice and said socialising and visit pubs and restaurants was grand. Sure of course people thought it was going to be safe. False sense of security. Can't blame people for getting sick after they followed the advice they were given by government. And for the established media cheerleading reopening that would have added to the sense of safety.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The gif here is gonna be how this government is seen. Hard to dispel it now after so many many cock-ups. Brilliant wee gif it is.https://twitter.com/thelittlegreen6/status/1346493688361451521
smurgen wrote: » The reality is FG released video after video promoting the Christmas reopening. Here's Leo building the safe narrative. Can't blame people for falling sick after following a false narrative.https://twitter.com/DeayCiaran/status/1345457474032300032?s=19
[Deleted User] wrote: » You know, Smurgen, some of us can actually think for ourselves. We don’t need the government to tell us how bad things are and that we’re safest staying home and avoiding people, including our children, siblings, etc as the alternative could lead to us never seeing them ever again.
Bishop of hope wrote: » That might be true in some ways. But families thought it was safe to intermingle and that they were bubbles of some sort I think. My sister and her husband would be cautious people. This was going to happen at Xmas regardless of restrictions. Included in that family I posted about are professional working people, not what you describe as typical devil may care youngsters. People who should know better. A garda, an assistant bank manager, a health care worker, a retired health care worker, a former legal secretary, and a lab technician in a pharmaceutical company. If you can't get a message through to them you're in trouble.
smurgen wrote: » People don't have access to the information government have. Not only that but most don't have the ability to interpret the information accurately. Government should air on the side of caution always.
Deleted User wrote: » You know, Smurgen, some of us can actually think for ourselves. We don’t need the government to tell us how bad things are and that we’re safest staying home and avoiding people, including our children, siblings, etc as the alternative could lead to us never seeing them ever again.
Deleted User wrote: » Shur, we’re all thick. Air heads the lot of us.
Floppybits wrote: » Where are most of the cases coming from? Is it from people going out to pubs and restaurants over the Christmas period? Thankfully so far no one in my family has got it as yet but we didn't go out to restaurants or pubs over the Christmas and kept our contacts to immediate family and even then it wasn't for long. Looking at a neighbour of mine with 4 kids, the youngest only a few months, having people coming and going all through the Christmas and staying over, they even had a party on New Year's, surprised that no one has been infected yet.
Floppybits wrote: » Speaking for yourself there. A lot of people will have restricted contacts over the Christmas period despite the government message. I know of families who told people not to come to their house and also who made arrangements to meet outside at Christmas. So there are lots of folks out there who made sensible decisions despite what the government were saying. Fact of the matter is that the government opened up despite the warnings and most sensible people knew this would happen. The only time where we can really open up is when the vaccinations start happening. It also seems the vaccination is going slower that what is happening in other countries, they had weeks to get a plan in place for this that should have kicked into action as soon as the vaccines arrived but no the HSE were still fumbling around with paperwork that could have been done prior to the vaccines arriving.
mikep wrote: » Fact of the matter is that if government had gone for hard lockdown they most likely assumed it would be ignored anyway .. also image the wailing from opposition, media etc. We spent a night in a hotel on the 22nd where all rules were being applied and we were fine, also felt very secure . Problems occurred where rules were being flaunted.. It's a dammed if you do dammed if you don't scenario..
McMurphy wrote: » Didn't Leo say something along the lines of "we know people are going to do it anyway" - with regards to people visiting etc, in other words he was assuming that people would break restrictions whether they were in place or not, which was pretty dam presumptuous and condescending imo.
mikep wrote: » You may see it as condescending and presumptuous, I see it as realistic and turned out to be accurate. I also knew this was going to happen and I still believe many will die in the coming weeks due to people believing they HAD to have a "normal" Christmas..
McMurphy wrote: » How did it turn out to be accurate? That is impossible to say. Lockdown was temporarily lifted, it was condescending and presumptuous to assume if it was kept in place - many people would have ignored it. I and my family have followed all the rules and regulations, no matter how pissed off and annoying some might have been (I haven't seen my parents since Feb 19) I am stating a fact you are speaking hypothetically.
crafty dodger wrote: » Can anyone let me know why we are not getting info on the numbers actually vaccinated on a daily basis? We are given numbers of tests carried out, number of positive tests in near realtime...i.e at the end of each day. What is so difficult about tracking and releasing the number who have actually received the vaccine and the planned rollout for the coming days? Is it because of no IT tracking system? Is it because the 'run rate' is embarrassingly low and might shine a light on on shambolic preperation for a vaccine program? Can someone enlighten me?
Floppybits wrote: » You would think the government would be getting the vaccine numbers out as quickly as possible to build up positivity. The only thing I can think off is that it is not happening and the government are not reporting it because it doesn't suit them to report it.
Bishop of hope wrote: » It's the Hse job to vaccinate not the Govts Tbf. I hope they are getting on with it, but it's important to update people too of course. I see the justice minister has tested positive, I hope for the best for her and her baby and family. No cabinet upset as such as no contact except virtual since before Xmas.https://m.independent.ie/news/pregnant-justice-minister-helen-mcentee-has-tested-positive-for-covid-19-39937898.html
smurgen wrote: » Hope she's and her baby are safe. It goes to show that a person can be safe and follow guidelines all the want. To express personal responsibility also but if the environment around you has become more dangerous then there's very little individuals can do.
mikep wrote: » 100% true. The general population decided that socialising was more important than protecting themselves and their loved ones. If any government had tried a lockdown over Christmas it would have been ignored. I find it utterly depressing that so many decided that their social life was that important and now it's"the government's" fault...
Bowie wrote: » We cannot change health restrictions based on 'ah sure'. We have people who continue to drive drunk that doesn't mean we don't bother with check points. Myself and everyone I know are in family bubbles and have not socialised outside of them. Like the 'we went mad', 'We all partied' spin, do we know the general population flouted advice or was it just politicians?
blanch152 wrote: » Family bubbles? A bubble is meant to be two households, no more.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
