Relaxation of Restrictions, Part X *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

We were in the best position to relax restrictions in May 2020 knowing what we did about Covid and its danger to only the elderly

Having Europe’s youngest population was a better defence than any vaccine

Here we are though, with the economic prospects of Ireland absolutely obliterated, and continuing as Europe’s most suppressed country for a few more months “just in case”

I wonder will the permanent lockdown defenders on here disappear when the economic catastrophe becomes fully evident in Ireland? The whole “every country is the same” is total rubbish, even France has kept its businesses open despite its “strict lockdown” as reported by RTE

Make no mistake, they will be nowhere to be found.
Looking at the figures it is staggering how much more debt we now have getting into this recession in comparison with the 2008. How one can think that this is just going to blow off?

Manic Moran wrote: »

I have to say, I'm pretty fuming right now. For all the talk about how the US has screwed up COVID, I'm glad I'm here and not in Ireland. My aunt is dying of cancer, a couple weeks to live. She's in Cork. My father, in Dublin, is fully vaccinated, but cannot go see her.

Sorry to hear about your Aunt, but whoever told you father he cannot see her is talking absolute shít.

Tell him plan the journey, he will under no circumstances be turned around.

If the poor lady is in a hospice or a care home he may have to make an appointment.

charlie14 wrote: »

It`s a sound strategy for opening the country if the numbers stay as they are and there are enough people vaccinated to keep numbers at a minimum so we do not have to go into another lockdown.
Your hodgepodge of "Green Zones" of small towns and villages scattered around the country with enforcement by these communities is not going to achieve that.
There are few things I enjoy more than a good session in small towns and villages. I am also enough of a realist to know that a local, or the son or daughter of a local, walking into a pub, restaurant or shop with friends from outside this "Green Zone" is not going to be refused service.
From someone who asked me did I know small local communities to believe otherwise is bonkers.

You're still ignoring the facts here that some counties have had low numbers of cases or zero cases in some areas for a number of months.. You seem to advocate keeping counties locked down while they wait for others to get down to a level of cases that allows they and all other counties to open up.... that's pro-lockdown and not following the data.

There's currently restrictions on leaving your county or 20k from home unless for essential reasons.

Of course there's going to be rule breakers as there is now, however there's a thing call contact tracing if an outbreak occurs and the zone can become red for a week while they trace the source....there's also the risk of being fined by the Gardai...

It's mad how pro-lockdowners would keep the entire country until level 5 if one half had zero to 10 cases per day and the other half with 200 a day, it's not a long term strategy.

Time to have a new living with covid Data driven strategy.... If you or any others aren't willing to support step out of lockdown then there's nothing I can say here to convince you otherwise.

gozunda wrote: »

I reckon Dr Colm Henry is correct about needing boosters.

But what you've added is just nonsense.

Once infection rates are under control and people have been fully vaccinated already there will be no need for a lockdown to be imposed so people can get booster shots.

Most likley most people will get their booster from their GP much the same as any other annual vaccination.

#morefakeoutrage

what about what has happened so far makes you think that there won't be "cases" next winter attributed to people needing their booster and a call for closing gyms/shops/pubs from NPHET?

exitfee wrote: »

Too early to be so confident tbh

What odds do Paddy Power give on a winter lockdown?

If cases start flying up in winter and vaccinated people start filling up hospital's we will be back in lockdown.

If cases and hospitalisations in vaccianted starts slowly increasing in England after indoor dining opens up next month on 17th May it won't be a good sign for Winter.

Will we have another lockdown in winter?

I wouldn't go to Paddy Power and put my life savings on it not happenng.

Would you?

If all throughout this coming winter, pubs are open and there are no travel restrictions, I will send a hand-written apology letter to both Gozunda and Boggles.

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I'm no fan of Trump but I would substitute 'adult' with 'geriatric war-monger'.

Really? Because you sound like a supporter.

Either way "war-monger" is probably what they needed.

Biden declares war on Covid

One has delivered 200m+ vaccines the other held super spreader events.

Go figure.

MrMiyagi12345 wrote: »

Could argue the exact same about obeying restrictions. If someone wants to eat themselves into an early grave that's their perogative. Likewise it's my perogative to get on with my life. I should not have my freedoms curtailed to protect them.

If you did it wouldn`t carry much weight as an arguement against restrictions. Someone eating themselves into an early grave is not going to kill anyone other than themself.

Boggles wrote: »

Jaysus for a lad who said he wasn't a fan.



Because I'm not discussing NATO and the Ukraine in the Relaxation of Restrictions thread?

Okay.

It was you who choose to pick up the 'war-monger' statement.

And no I'm not a fan but I dont care what you think. I dont have to prove anything to you.

CalamariFritti wrote: »

It was you who choose to pick up the 'war-monger' statement.

You mean your one line post in response to me that included?

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I'm no fan of Trump but I would substitute 'adult' with 'geriatric war-monger'.

There was nothing else really to pick out of it, was there in reality?

showpony1 wrote: »

what about what has happened so far makes you think that there won't be "cases" next winter attributed to people needing their booster and a call for closing gyms/shops/pubs from NPHET?

Not what you suggested btw.

showpony1 wrote:

Lockdown again next winter while every single one of the population, not just the vulnerable, gets their booster.

Eitherway simple answer people will already have been fully vaccinated.

You get your booster before that vaccination runs out. Absolutely no need for a Lock down as your imagining

If there's isolated cases- they'll just be that.

gozunda wrote: »

I reckon Dr Colm Henry is correct about needing boosters.

But what you've added is just nonsense.

Once infection rates are under control and people have been fully vaccinated already there will be no need for a lockdown to be imposed so people can get booster shots.

Most likley most people will get their booster from their GP much the same as any other annual vaccination.

#morefakeoutrage

Yes but this idea of avoiding future lockdowns unfortunately requires a major leap into hypocrisy for those people who have spent the last year calling those against the restrictions “selfish”. That’s because the vista you describe there (i.e. that there will be no need to have another lockdown) means accepting that people will die of infectious disease who might otherwise have not died of it if we introduced lockdown in the cold months of every year. It means that their lives are, to use a similar narrative to what we have become used discourse of late, expendable for you to be able to go for a pint.

Essentially, those who have called others selfish and accused them of treating lives as being expendable prices to pay for trivial freedoms like going to the pub must themselves become selfish and start advocating (consciously or unconsciously) the idea that people’s lives are once again expendable prices to pay for trivial freedoms like going to the pub. Ultimately, it all comes down to the value of someone’s life versus people being able to go for pints not being based on compassion — but simply a selfish game of what numbers we deem acceptable.

charlie14 wrote: »

higgledy-piggledy
complete and utter unworkable nonsense.

Is that your scientific opinion?


Anyways fine, don't believe me IRDC, but this is a proven way to handle restrictions by the data and according to the area...otherwise we continue with the sledgehammer blanket lockdown(s).

Here, have a read:

https://www.coronavirus.vic.gov.au/victorian-travel-permit-system

gozunda wrote: »

Mental health is important. I don't think anyone said otherwise.

As to the rest - well that would amount to attacking those you don't agree with. And rubbish btw.

For example - just above I suggested there'd be no need for lockdowns once people are fully vaccinated and I've been told that there might be 'cases' by someone who is evidently anti restrictions and therefore there will be "lockdowns"

No one "likes" restrictions. However as a tool to keep down the rate of infection whilst vaccinations are rolled out - they're necessary. And for every Billy mates who comes on to big themselves up as to how they're not observing any restrictions whatsoever - simply means everyone else has to shoulder a bit more for them.

That said I guess there will always those that have to be carried over the line. Kicking and screaming if need be.

A poster who also moderates something or other suggested yesterday that mental health problems weren't an issue as there were no additional suicides last year according to the BBC or something.

I might be mixing up two posters tho, as their posting style and messaging are very 'clone-like'

Might you agree posts like that are a tad silly?

ArthurDayne wrote: »

Yes but this idea of avoiding future lockdowns unfortunately requires a major leap into hypocrisy for those people who have spent the last year calling those against the restrictions “selfish”. That’s because the vista you describe there (i.e. that there will be no need to have another lockdown) means accepting that people will die of infectious disease who might otherwise have not died of it if we introduced lockdown in the cold months of every year. It means that their lives are, to use a similar narrative to what we have become used discourse of late, expendable for you to be able to go for a pint.
Essentially, those who have called others selfish and accused them of treating lives as being expendable prices to pay for trivial freedoms like going to the pub must themselves become selfish and start advocating (consciously or unconsciously) the idea that people’s lives are once again expendable prices to pay prices to pay for trivial freedoms like going to the pub. Ultimately, it all comes down to the value of someone’s life versus people being able to go for pints not being based on compassion — but simply a selfish game of what numbers we deem acceptable.

The only hypocrisy I see - is in that statement.

Because firstly it's not just about 'deaths' - its about keeping the rate of infection of this new disease down as we get people fully vaccinated.

It is also a very lazy attempt at bizarrely pushing the idea that all other existing diseases must be managed as a pandemic. Even where they are normal background diseases with existing immunisation and treatment.

Those who who are covid deniers or skeptics aren't "selfish" imo as you are calling them - but they certainly seem to have their heads in the sand. Doesn't mean other people shouldn't call them out for that btw.

Once the pandemic is declared over - there may well be changes to how things are done. But the pandemic will be over and drastic measures such as your vision of permanent lockdowns won't be needed.

And that vista you describe of "the cold months of the year" can also be managed by annual vaccinations. Up that rate of vaccination and that also becomes less of a yearly problem.

Or of course we could continue moaning and whinging without actually understanding any of that.

So question - are you really suggesting we stay in lockdown forever - even when the pandemic is over because otherwise we're all "hypocrites"?

An Interesting anti lockdown approach there alright..

Sobit1964 wrote: »

A poster who also moderates something or other suggested yesterday that mental health problems weren't an issue as there were no additional suicides last year according to the BBC or something.

I might be mixing up two posters tho, as their posting style and messaging are very 'clone-like'

Might you agree posts like that are a tad silly?

If you are suggesting I or a moderator you know somehow have multiple accounts or are a 'clone' Then report it.