FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

You mean these warnings from the experts? Looks like the situation has ended up 5 times worse that their worst case scenario projection.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/coronavirus-cases-could-reach-1200-a-day-after-christmas-expert-warns-1046100.html

Means nothing when they still advocated level 5.

smurgen wrote: »

Means nothing when they still advocated level 5.

Government obviously made a decision based on NPHET projections, and the situation has ended up at least 5 times worse than their worst case scenario projection.

To say that "means nothing" is just bizarre to be honest. The projections clearly failed.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Government obviously made a decision based on NPHET projections, and the situation has ended up at least 5 times worse than their worst case scenario projection.

To say that "means nothing" is just bizarre to be honest. The projections clearly failed.

So it's NPHET's fault government ignored them? Tell me this what we're governments own projections that supported their stance to keep things open?

smurgen wrote: »

So it's NPHET's fault government ignored them? Tell me this what we're governments own projections that supported their stance to keep things open?

I think you are misunderstanding my point smurg if that's the conclusion you have arrived at. Very odd. I don't even know what your second point is, NPHET make the projections.

Must bit a bit like the negative market cap scenario all over again.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I think you are misunderstanding my point smurg if that's the conclusion you have arrived at. Very odd. I don't even know what your second point is, NPHET make the projections.

Must bit a bit like the negative market cap scenario all over again.

I wonder what would happen if a drunk driver took that stance on court? "I'm not to blame your honor, no one told me I would crash and wipe out a whole family. Someone should have pointed out how bad it could be before I broke the law."

[Deleted User]

smurgen wrote: »

I wonder what would happen if a drunk driver took that stance on court? "I'm not to blame your honor, no one told me I would crash and wipe out a whole family. Someone should have pointed out how bad it could be before I broke the law."

Childish and pathetic level of debate.

McMurphy

Tbf - Holohan and NPHET gave fair enough warnings as to restrictions needing to be tightened, and the repercussions that would follow if they weren't.

Leo Varadkar in particular publicly attacked Holohan and NPHET on a prime time current affairs show, and basically said they were talking from their hoop.

Shock horror - Holohan and NPHETs predictions were correct, we've went to being one of the absolute worst affected places in the EU.

It's the people's fault though. :cool:

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Government obviously made a decision based on NPHET projections, and the situation has ended up at least 5 times worse than their worst case scenario projection.

To say that "means nothing" is just bizarre to be honest. The projections clearly failed.

Why are you trying to gloss over Varadkar's very public repudiation of NPHET's advice and the government ignoring it twice with disastrous consequences meaning that they had to introduce the restrictions NPHET called for?

Bishop of hope

McMurphy wrote: »

Tbf - Holohan and NPHET gave fair enough warnings as to restrictions needing to be tightened, and the repercussions that would follow if they weren't.

Leo Varadkar in particular publicly attacked Holohan and NPHET on a prime time current affairs show, and basically said they were talking from their hoop.

Shock horror - Holohan and NPHETs predictions were correct, we've went to being one of the absolute worst affected places in the EU.

It's the people's fault though. :cool:

Just an example Mc of the, people's fault, that wasn't actually maybe the people's fault or the, govts.
Before Xmas we did a shop in Dunnes longford.
Crowded in there, queues back the Isles and you had to pick your way through them as we shopped and take stuff off the shelves beside the queus. No problem getting in.
Today we, went to Dunnes in Longford again, we had to join a queue to get in about 50 0r 60 long outside, but inside there were no queues and shopping was spacious and much easier.

smurgen wrote: »

I wonder what would happen if a drunk driver took that stance on court? "I'm not to blame your honor, no one told me I would crash and wipe out a whole family. Someone should have pointed out how bad it could be before I broke the law."

You are literally making no sense mate. Do you want to actually debate the point at hand maybe?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why are you trying to gloss over Varadkar's very public repudiation of NPHET's advice and the government ignoring it twice with disastrous consequences meaning that they had to introduce the restrictions NPHET called for?

Exactly Varadkar said it was for government to see the bigger picture and that NPHET advice was not thought through. So what was the evidence they produced or data to counter NPHET's advice? I mean what information allowed their decision to throw caution to the wind?

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why are you trying to gloss over Varadkar's very public repudiation of NPHET's advice and the government ignoring it twice with disastrous consequences meaning that they had to introduce the restrictions NPHET called for?

I am talking about projections NPHET made in December for the Christmas period. No amount of whataboutery will impact those projections.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I am talking about projections NPHET made in December for the Christmas period. No amount of whataboutery will impact those projections.

But your argument would only hold weight if NPHET had advocated lighter restrictions to be implemented than the government and they didn't.

smurgen wrote: »

But your argument would only hold weight if NPHET had advocated lighter restrictions to be implemented than the government and they didn't.

They projected worst case 1,200 cases a day by mid January if Government went ahead with the opening up. Government obviously weighed that up against all the other considerations and deemed it worth the risk.

If NPHET had projected 6k+ cases a day by the 5th of January then clearly the Government would have made a very different decision.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I am talking about projections NPHET made in December for the Christmas period. No amount of whataboutery will impact those projections.

So why weren't there tighter restrictions at Christmas?

No amount of whataboutery now, answer the question asked.

Jaded Walker

This whole government is horrendous. The sad thing is there's nobody better out there.
We need a new party made up of professional people like accountants, doctors and nurses to sort out the HSE once and for all. We need people with experience in every profession and economists to run for government and win.
It's become evident during this pandemic that the majority of our politicians are not very smart.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So why weren't there tighter restrictions at Christmas?

No amount of whataboutery now, answer the question asked.

Francis asking for no whataboutery

Clearly because the Government weighed up the worst case scenario projection by NPHET of the opening up of 1.2k cases a day by mid January against all the other considerations and decided it was worth the risk.

Do you think they would have arrived at the same conclusion if NPHET projections showed 6k plus cases 2 weeks earlier?

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

They projected worst case 1,200 cases a day by mid January if Government went ahead with the opening up. Government obviously weighed that up against all the other considerations and deemed it worth the risk.

If NPHET had projected 6k+ cases a day by the 5th of January then clearly the Government would have made a very different decision.

But where's the data to show the cost benefit of throwing caution to the wind? Why do you put the burden of proof on NPHET that were advocating stricter restrictions yet absolve government who enacted lighter restrictions?

smurgen wrote: »

But where's the data to show the cost benefit of throwing caution to the wind? Why do you put the burden of proof on NPHET that were advocating stricter restrictions yet absolve government who enacted lighter restrictions?

They already had the data from NPHET of relaxing restrictions, so I don't have a clue what you are try to say here. It was 1.2K cases per day by mid January, as I have already said. Turned out NPHETS projections were wrong by at least a magnitude of 5.

Fann Linn

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

They already had the data from NPHET of relaxing restrictions, so I don't have a clue what you are try to say here. It was 1.2K cases per day by mid January, as I have already said. Turned out NPHETS projections were wrong by at least a magnitude of 5.

Taken from your link of 3Dec I believe Nphet were mentioning minimum figures on small increases of the R number:

Quote:Prof Nolan said the reproductive rate of coronavirus was 0.8 to 1 at present.

He said: “The more contacts, the higher the R number will go, the higher the number of cases we will be seeing in January.”

Professor Nolan said small increases in the R number to 1.6 could produce between 800 and 1,200 cases a day.

Dr Holohan said: “It is not inevitable. It is still within our grasp as a country to take the kind of measures that can help protect against that reality.”

He said the modelling was not scaremongering and these were not predictions.'

My last post on this matter, since people have no interest in actually debating the facts on their merit.

As late as 17 December, NPHET were still projecting up to 1.2k cases per day by the 2nd week of January. Their projections clearly failed.

https://www.thejournal.ie/coronavirus-latest-figures-ireland-26-5303826-Dec2020/

Fann Linn wrote: »

Taken from your link of 3Dec I believe Nphet were mentioning minimum figures on small increases of the R number:

Quote:Prof Nolan said the reproductive rate of coronavirus was 0.8 to 1 at present.

He said: “The more contacts, the higher the R number will go, the higher the number of cases we will be seeing in January.”

Professor Nolan said small increases in the R number to 1.6 could produce between 800 and 1,200 cases a day.

Dr Holohan said: “It is not inevitable. It is still within our grasp as a country to take the kind of measures that can help protect against that reality.”

He said the modelling was not scaremongering and these were not predictions.'

They predicted 1200 cases a day after xmas at that stage. Saint stephen's day had 1300. Either way it would only make a difference if they were asking for less restrictions.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Francis asking for no whataboutery

Clearly because the Government weighed up the worst case scenario projection by NPHET of the opening up of 1.2k cases a day by mid January against all the other considerations and decided it was worth the risk.

Do you think they would have arrived at the same conclusion if NPHET projections showed 6k plus cases 2 weeks earlier?

So Nphet got the exact figures wrong and the government got the whole scenario disastrously wrong.

Who gets the criticism in the FG cohort's world...the people. Thankfully 'the people' are not stupid and as I said this government will have frittered away the bounce they got at the start and FG will continue to fall back to election levels of support.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

My last post on this matter, since people have no interest in actually debating the facts on their merit.

As late as 17 December, NPHET were still projecting up to 1.2k cases per day by the 2nd week of January. Their projections clearly failed.

https://www.thejournal.ie/coronavirus-latest-figures-ireland-26-5303826-Dec2020/

What the f***?

A few weeks ago, 1200 cases a day was a shocking and scary figure to be at...we are now at almost 9000 cases a day.

To summarize the stance of the usual government cultists in here - public defy government health advice = lack of personal responsibility by the public. Government defy NPHET'S advice = NPHET'S advice lacks accuracy. So people are expected to exercise better judgement and be more responsible than government. A government with 60 advisors and access to all the data money can buy. Absolutely incredible.

[Deleted User]

smurgen wrote: »

To summarize the stance of the usual government cultists in here - public defy government health advice = lack of personal responsibility by the public. Government defy NPHET'S advice = NPHET'S advice lacks accuracy. So people are expected to exercise better judgement and be more responsible than government. A government with 60 advisors and access to all the data money can buy. Absolutely incredible.

All the advice and guidelines in the world are worthless if the people ignore them. After all, we cannot each have a personal advisor telling us what to do. Simples.

Cluedo Monopoly

Jaded Walker wrote: »

This whole government is horrendous. The sad thing is there's nobody better out there.
We need a new party made up of professional people like accountants, doctors and nurses to sort out the HSE once and for all. We need people with experience in every profession and economists to run for government and win.
It's become evident during this pandemic that the majority of our politicians are not very smart.

You're right. Our political system is a shambles. Our permanent government (civil servants) are unaccountable too.
We must demand better standards. Way too much corruption too.
Removing the stranglehold FF+FG had on 'power' will be a good start. Hopefully better politicians and parties enter the system.

Finty Lemon

Some context is needed here, though it might not suit the opportunists who seem to be revelling in the situation.

Early Sept Early Jan
Germany 2000 18000
UK 6000 68000
Netherlands 1400 9100
NZ 0 0
Spain 11000 14000 (having risen to 49000)
Belgium 1300 3000 (having risen to 23000)
France 7110 19000 (having risen to 60,000)
Japan 298 7800
Chile 1200 4300
Israel 1900 7600
Greece 169 932 (having risen to 3200)
Finland 8 300 (having risen to >2500)
Portugal 585 10700
Italy 640 21000
Czech Rep 317 14800
Hungary 150 2900 (having been 6800)
Iceland 4 46 (having risen to 106)
Switzerland 157 4200 (having risen to 10,600)
Malaysia 14 3027

Many countries are struggling with the latest exponential Covid spike, with the exception of NZ which does to be fair enjoy significant geographical advantages. New variant has thrown a curve-ball to the epidemiological models but at least the situation has been defined now.

The notion being peddled that Ireland is somehow an errant outlier on Covid control is not supported by the facts. It is dangerous to public morale and risks reducing adherence to advice and fomenting suspicion about vaccination also. Narrow political agendas are being placed before a national imperative.

Severe, short lockdowns are buying time for vaccine roll-out. That will work here too if people stop 2nd guessing the regulations and do what is needed.

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

All the advice and guidelines in the world are worthless if the people ignore them. After all, we cannot each have a personal advisor telling us what to do. Simples.

Which is why there is a need for making guidelines into laws. Laws which are enforced.
But in order for that to happen it requires govt to enact those laws and insure they are enforced and there are repercussions for breaking them.

See where this is going?

Senators on golfing jollies.
Minister going shopping.
Big State funeral.
Cans in the Park.
Hopping around the country for photo ops.