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

FintanMcluskey · 31-07-2020 2:54pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Given all that, and then just on the personal level of not wanting to get infected myself, I think it is a good idea to lower the risk and that masks play a role in that.

Fear for personal safety is a huge, albeit misguided, motivation for many throughout this

ixoy · 31-07-2020 2:55pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

Care you detail out your reasoning behind not ever wanting to wear a mask at your front door?

To be fair, we're meant to be listening to the experts and, in an Irish context, those experts are not telling, or advising, us to wear masks outdoors right now.

skelly22 · 31-07-2020 3:08pm

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

There is 2 groups of people, those believing the restrictions saved lives or whatever bolix the media are telling them.

The second group are able to think for themselves

I imagine control of the planet will eventually come down to a straightforward battle: Face Mask & Head Visor Wearers -v- Tin Hat Wearers.
One side has a definite head start in terms of already being kitted out.

Penfailed · 31-07-2020 3:10pm

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

There is 2 groups of people, those believing the restrictions saved lives or whatever bolix the media are telling them.

The second group are able to think for themselves

It's completely wrong to say that those believing that the restrictions saved lives cannot think for themselves. Just because they think differently from you, does not equate to lacking independent thought.

skelly22 · 31-07-2020 3:20pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

I'm sorry that your own words work against you but that is your fault not mine.

You stated that you would not be convinced to wear a mask. Therefore, it doesn't matter what the facts are, or another way to say it 'to hell with the facts'

I asked you three simple questions, which of course you have not been able to even attempt to answer.

Not sure why you threw in the childish remark at the end. I think masks are a good idea for the following reasons;

I understand that particles travel in the air and that having a covering limits the spread. Do you disagree with that?
I understand that people may have the virus without having symptoms and as such may be producing said particles to infect others. Do you agree with that?
I understand that the person at the door, in your example may or may not have immunity, I have no way of knowing. Do you accept this?
I understand that should the other person have the virus and pass it to me I can inadvertently infect my family, friends and colleagues before I know I have it. Do you agree with that?
I have listened to some of the experts (as in not every single one) and the broad consensus appears to be that whilst the effects of masks may be limited, they do no harm to the wearer? Do you think they cause harm?

Given all that, and then just on the personal level of not wanting to get infected myself, I think it is a good idea to lower the risk and that masks play a role in that.

So I don't think I have simply blindly accepting anything.

Care you detail out your reasoning behind not ever wanting to wear a mask at your front door?

I'd be curious to know what it would actually take for you to maybe say "Hmmmm.....that's a bit strange" with regard to govt-imposed restrictions. You seem to have a high tolerance level. Would you tolerate shopping at Tesco in a Space Suit, for example, if the man on the telly says the current mask design is insufficient as it leaves your eyes uncovered? Genuine question.

growleaves · 31-07-2020 3:24pm

Penfailed wrote: »

It's completely wrong to say that those believing that the restrictions saved lives cannot think for themselves. Just because they think differently from you, does not equate to lacking independent thought.

In some cases though, it has been said "I trust [other people to do my thinking for me]". (Paraphrase of "I trust the experts")

That is ceding independent thought to trusted authorities, and is considered responsible, and every independent attempt to get at the truth is met with appeals to the weight of authority, itself heavily mediated by politicians and journalists.

Leroy42 · 31-07-2020 3:44pm

skelly22 wrote: »

I'd be curious to know what it would actually take for you to maybe say "Hmmmm.....that's a bit strange" with regard to govt-imposed restrictions. You seem to have a high tolerance level. Would you tolerate shopping at Tesco in a Space Suit, for example, if the man on the telly says the current mask design is insufficient as it leaves your eyes uncovered? Genuine question.

I'd be curious to know whether you have any actual basis for your position that wearing masks is pointless.

You seem incapable of answering any questions.

I have stated numerous times that I have looked for answers, asked questions. Just because I have a different opinion to yours does not mean I haven't asked questions. If anything it appears you don't seem to want to engage in any questions, again going back to your line that nothing will convince you.

I would happily admit that masks are pointless if that can be shown to be the case. Whilst there are certainly different opinions on it, the risk factor would suggest that taking precautions is the better option until we can say definitely one way or the other.

You think wearing a face mask is something that is particular difficult or requires a high tolerance? I assume you weat seatbelts, put life jackets on when in a boat, teach your children to cross at designated crossing and wait for the green man. Do you stop at red lights?

All of these are imposed on you, yet you adhere to them, seemingly without question.

In terms of the face mask covering the eyes, I see that medical personnel wear them. In many cases they are actually easier to wear, I see hairdresser etc wearing them.

Depends who the man on the telly is and on what basis he is claiming it. Does he think it will help stop the spread? Is their evidence from other places that it would work?

Critical thinking doesn't just mean you take the opposite position of experts. You need to question it, look at the evidence and evaluate it, as much as possible within the confines of ones knowledge.

There may well come a time when something so infectious and dangerous comes along that we would have to wear hazmat suits to walk into a shop. I don't think we are there, but if it ever did arise then yes, I would take the precautions necessary.

Leroy42 · 31-07-2020 3:51pm

growleaves wrote: »

In some cases though, it has been said "I trust [other people to do my thinking for me]". (Paraphrase of "I trust the experts")

That is ceding independent thought to trusted authorities, and is considered responsible, and every independent attempt to get at the truth is met with appeals to the weight of authority, itself heavily mediated by politicians and journalists.

There is a big difference in saying one trusting the experts (which we all do to varying degrees every day) and not questioning it. I trust the pilot of the plane because of the safety record, the regulations, the training programs etc. I don't trust them personally simply because they are a pilot.

The issue is not with the questioning of experts, that is perfectly fine and what we should be doing. But there is a big difference between questioning and simply refusing to believe.

The line - 'simply accepting without question' or varities of it has been thrown out a number of times without any reasoning behind it. It seems that some people seem to think that disbelieving experts put them ahead of everyone else, but sfor no other reason that to be seen to be 'thinking independently'.

skelly22 · 31-07-2020 4:12pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

I'd be curious to know whether you have any actual basis for your position that wearing masks is pointless.

You seem incapable of answering any questions.

I have stated numerous times that I have looked for answers, asked questions. Just because I have a different opinion to yours does not mean I haven't asked questions. If anything it appears you don't seem to want to engage in any questions, again going back to your line that nothing will convince you.

I would happily admit that masks are pointless if that can be shown to be the case. Whilst there are certainly different opinions on it, the risk factor would suggest that taking precautions is the better option until we can say definitely one way or the other.

You think wearing a face mask is something that is particular difficult or requires a high tolerance? I assume you weat seatbelts, put life jackets on when in a boat, teach your children to cross at designated crossing and wait for the green man. Do you stop at red lights?

All of these are imposed on you, yet you adhere to them, seemingly without question.

In terms of the face mask covering the eyes, I see that medical personnel wear them. In many cases they are actually easier to wear, I see hairdresser etc wearing them.

Depends who the man on the telly is and on what basis he is claiming it. Does he think it will help stop the spread? Is their evidence from other places that it would work?

Critical thinking doesn't just mean you take the opposite position of experts. You need to question it, look at the evidence and evaluate it, as much as possible within the confines of ones knowledge.

There may well come a time when something so infectious and dangerous comes along that we would have to wear hazmat suits to walk into a shop. I don't think we are there, but if it ever did arise then yes, I would take the precautions necessary.

At no point have I said masks are pointless. You continue to mis-quote me. I said I won't be forced to wear one in public should it come to it. Nothing else.

growleaves · 31-07-2020 4:16pm

Leroy42,

I see little recognition or acknowledgement of expert over-certainty, even in the teeth of multiple reversals and updates.

The predictions and proscriptions which remain unvalidated hypotheses (even though people believe that this or that correlation 'settles the matter', 'its all the proof I need' etc.) should be admitted to be unproven, and not taken on faith, merely as a technical matter.

I think I've said it before, but since lockdown is inherently bad there is actually no reason for anyone to want it to be crucially necessary (bar a few famous politicians and scientists who staked their reputations on it.) Therefore with a basic understanding of falsifiability (sadly lacking in many) we should all be lockdown sceptics.

Instead we have people who are partisans in favour of lockdown. They deliberately blur the definition of scientific proof (one poster in the megathread wanted to apply "proof of concept" to a scientific question, uh huh) and seize on correlative phenomena in lieu of a real scientific investigation. Why do they do that?

In theory, no one has any reason to do so but in practice mass panic and the irrational desire to 'do something' and now the desire to feel vindicated and that something was done AND to want to feel that nature is controllable through political actions (it isn't) all contribute imo.

bucketybuck · 31-07-2020 8:36pm

Leroy42 wrote: »

I would happily admit that masks are pointless if that can be shown to be the case.

To play devils advocate, during the worst of the pandemic in March/April/May, masks were not required and were not worn by the general public. During that time food shops remained open and were busier than ever for obvious reasons.

The virus was in the community at that stage, so why was it not rampant throughout those open shops? Why weren't Tesco employees dropping like flies with the virus?

Since they were not dropping like flies then and still aren't today, why then are masks now required? Logic would say that they are a bit pointless at this stage, no?

You say "if it can be shown to be the case", I would suggest that perhaps it has been shown to be the case.

bucketybuck · 31-07-2020 8:42pm

I see that the pattern continues with RTE's headlines.

When there are deaths that is the headline, front and centre. But when there are no deaths, which is more common than not these days, does the headline say that? No, it says "Some not self-isolating, risk spreading virus - Glynn". Or "Any spike in Covid-19 cases is concerning - Taoiseach".

I am no tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist but I'm not stupid either, anybody who cannot see the spin in place from the national broadcaster is being wilfully ignorant.

FintanMcluskey · 31-07-2020 8:43pm

bucketybuck wrote: »

To play devils advocate, during the worst of the pandemic in March/April/May, masks were not required and were not worn by the general public. During that time food shops remained open and were busier than ever for obvious reasons.

The virus was in the community at that stage, so why was it not rampant throughout those open shops? Why weren't Tesco employees dropping like flies with the virus?

Since they were not dropping like flies then and still aren't today, why then are masks now required? Logic would say that they are a bit pointless at this stage, no?

You say "if it can be shown to be the case", I would suggest that perhaps it has been shown to be the case.

Lack of evidence doesnt have any bearing on a lack of compliance.

I understand the mechanics of the catholic church era in Ireland now

hamburgham · 31-07-2020 9:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a key point that tends to get forgotten.
The will of the people is ultimately the most important thing.

I can't put a timeline on it, but eventually things will start to boil over.
People are at breaking point.

Are they though? I cannot get over the number of people I meet who have swallowed the scare stories lock stock and barrel. Nor can I get over the fact that there is no outcry over the travel situation. Even people who have lost money cancelling holidays are fairly nonchalant about it.

jimmycrackcorm · 01-08-2020 12:30am

hamburgham wrote: »

Are they though? I cannot get over the number of people I meet who have swallowed the scare stories lock stock and barrel. Nor can I get over the fact that there is no outcry over the travel situation. Even people who have lost money cancelling holidays are fairly nonchalant about it.

I think the stories that came out during the height of the crisis in Italy, of people dying at home without even making it to hospital and the army having to take away coffins, made people feel glad we didn't end up the same.

Quantum Erasure · 01-08-2020 1:08am

It's easy to forget all that though, it was months ago

FintanMcluskey · 01-08-2020 1:14am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think the stories that came out during the height of the crisis in Italy, of people dying at home without even making it to hospital and the army having to take away coffins, made people feel glad we didn't end up the same.

Harrowing images indeed.

The fact they weren't witnessed in ireland had more to do with demographics than restrictions however.

The region in Italy that seen those images was in northern Italy where 10m citizen's lived in an area the size of munster. The age profile in this region was one of the highest in Europe if I remember correctly and the hospitals got over crowded very quickly.

The point I'm making is, the restrictions did not prevent this happening in Ireland, it was the fact the demographics of Ireland were vastly different

irishproduce · 01-08-2020 1:23am

bucketybuck wrote: »

I see that the pattern continues with RTE's headlines.

When there are deaths that is the headline, front and centre. But when there are no deaths, which is more common than not these days, does the headline say that? No, it says "Some not self-isolating, risk spreading virus - Glynn". Or "Any spike in Covid-19 cases is concerning - Taoiseach".

I am no tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist but I'm not stupid either, anybody who cannot see the spin in place from the national broadcaster is being wilfully ignorant.

An excellent observation and you're not wrong.

Quantum Erasure · 01-08-2020 2:12am

"bad news makes headlines shocker"

Leroy42 · 01-08-2020 9:09am

bucketybuck wrote: »

To play devils advocate, during the worst of the pandemic in March/April/May, masks were not required and were not worn by the general public. During that time food shops remained open and were busier than ever for obvious reasons.

The virus was in the community at that stage, so why was it not rampant throughout those open shops? Why weren't Tesco employees dropping like flies with the virus?

Since they were not dropping like flies then and still aren't today, why then are masks now required? Logic would say that they are a bit pointless at this stage, no?

You say "if it can be shown to be the case", I would suggest that perhaps it has been shown to be the case.

It was a very different situation. The entire country was in lockdown. The number of people going to work was vastly reduced, schools closed, sport stopped. Older people were cocooned.

The shops were not busier than normal. People were certainly buying more each time they went, they they were going less often. There were pretty tough restrictions in place. 2 metres, hand sanitizer, perspex. Kids were not allowed into most shops.

But the main difference was the reduced number of different interactions. People were effectively in a bubble for the vast majority of the time.

Once the harshest restrictions were lifted it is well known that people tend to relax. You can see it everywhere. People are less concerned about distance, more people are going shopping, work, sports etc etc. This the risk level is increased. The use of masks is to try to bring something in to reduce that risk level.

I also, think, and this is nothing but an opinion of mine, that given the public's rush to buy toilet paper, hand gels etc, and the shortage of PPE across the world, a decision was taken that calling for masks at a time when lock down was in place would only drive another shortage and could lead to additional panic. Some decisions need to be made based on how people will react not just on the science.

But lets us say that your devils advocate position is perfectly correct. To what end do you think the governments around the world are calling for facemasks to be worn? Do you really believe this is the start of a move to total control?

That they using this to test the limits they can push and control the populations.

So on one hand we have the knowledge that face coverings reduce the risk of the spread of particulate diseases. On the other we have a global population control conspiracy.

The flaw in the argument is that we know that face masks stop the spread of particulants. It is why people put their hand up when coughing or sneezing. Nobody has been able to show me anything that shows that facemasks don't help in this regard.

01-08-2020 9:55am

Our numbers actually appear to be going up since more started wearing masks.

I do wonder if they are actually worse. People can’t stop fidgeting and messing at them, scratching their faces etc.

gmisk · 01-08-2020 9:58am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Our numbers actually appear to be going up since more started wearing masks.

I do wonder if they are actually worse. People can’t stop fidgeting and messing at them, scratching their faces etc.

Nothing to do with places reopening, workplaces, shops, luas rammed, train same, buses at 50 percent no?

Masks have helped hugely in other countries they can definitely help here.

I will say some places are very lax now when it comes to limiting numbers, marks and Spencer's on Mary street was rammed yesterday I'd say 50 percent had masks, a few weeks back numbers allowed in shop were tiny.

pjohnson · 01-08-2020 10:00am

gmisk wrote: »

Nothing to do with places reopening, workplaces, shops, luas rammed, train same, buses at 50 percent no?

Masks have helped hugely in other countries they can definitely help here.

I will say some places are very lax now when it comes to limiting numbers, marks and Spencer's on Mary street was rammed yesterday I'd say 50 percent had masks, a few weeks back numbers allowed in shop were tiny.

It seems people now want to go back a few phases so we can do without masks again.

bucketybuck · 01-08-2020 10:29am

Leroy42 wrote: »

But lets us say that your devils advocate position is perfectly correct. To what end do you think the governments around the world are calling for facemasks to be worn? Do you really believe this is the start of a move to total control?

Why do you ask if I really believe that when I never said it in the first place? I am certainly not some whacko government control conspiracy theorist.

Why are masks being forced? Probably for the same reason we have queues at airport security, because such things have to be seen to be done regardless of their efficacy. Masks are an easy win, certainly easier than making other, harder decisions so you hear about masks when I would suggest they will make a negligible difference to future case load.

Wear masks but leave the airports open, how does that make any sense? Wear masks only after the death rate has fallen to near zero, is that logical?

01-08-2020 10:33am

pjohnson wrote: »

It seems people now want to go back a few phases so we can do without masks again.

We have proof they are not needed. They didn’t help to flatten the curve. They haven’t helped since. Supermarket staff were fine without them.

More people have started masks and numbers are not dropping. They are actually increasing.

At best, they are ineffective. Possibly even worse if you keep touching your face.

AUDI20 · 01-08-2020 10:47am

One thing I noticed lately is the use of disposable masks. some are just putting them back in their pockets or trowing them in the front of their car and re using them again for their next visit to the shop etc. They are masking up as advised but I was talking to one person and they have been using the same disposal mask for the last two weeks, keeps it in the car for when needed. so in this situation I think masks could be ineffective

pgj2015 · 01-08-2020 1:02pm

Deleted User wrote: »

We have proof they are not needed. They didn’t help to flatten the curve. They haven’t helped since. Supermarket staff were fine without them.

More people have started masks and numbers are not dropping. They are actually increasing.

At best, they are ineffective. Possibly even worse if you keep touching your face.

I just wear the same one which is a disposable one,have been wearing it 2 weeks now. most people i know are at the same because people look at you like you are Hitler if you dont have one on in a shop. better off not wearing one.

growleaves · 01-08-2020 1:07pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Our numbers actually appear to be going up since more started wearing masks.

I do wonder if they are actually worse. People can’t stop fidgeting and messing at them, scratching their faces etc.

I'll try to dig out the link later but some researchers think they increase viral load by trapping it at the front of the wearers' face.

As with most of these restrictions, it's truthfully an open question whether they are helpful, harmful or indifferent.

01-08-2020 2:36pm

growleaves wrote: »

I'll try to dig out the link later but some researchers think they increase viral load by trapping it at the front of the wearers' face.

As with most of these restrictions, it's truthfully an open question whether they are helpful, harmful or indifferent.

I do find it curious that numbers are increasing when that’s the only thing that has changed.

bush · 01-08-2020 2:40pm

I dont think they really make a difference either way. I only wear it to avoid hassle.

Gael23 · 01-08-2020 3:02pm

Have heard pubs won’t be allowed open as scheduled

statesaver · 01-08-2020 3:52pm

Gael23 wrote: »

Have heard pubs won’t be allowed open as scheduled

Heard from where ?

PTH2009 · 01-08-2020 3:52pm

Gael23 wrote: »

Have heard pubs won’t be allowed open as scheduled

****ing joke and pure speculation by the government who are too cowardly to open them up

Penfailed · 01-08-2020 4:47pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

****ing joke and pure speculation by the government who are too cowardly to open them up

Speculation by the government? It's speculation posting on here that the pubs won't open unless there's actually factual information about it.

Polar101 · 01-08-2020 5:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

We have proof they are not needed. They didn’t help to flatten the curve. They haven’t helped since. Supermarket staff were fine without them.

More people have started masks and numbers are not dropping. They are actually increasing.

I think you are just picking the numbers that support your argument, to make it look like the statistics show that. The reality is that there are no statistics (yet) that prove whether masks are useful or not in Ireland.

Certainly makes sense to use them on public transport, after social distancing rules were relaxed.

PTH2009 · 01-08-2020 5:59pm

Thinking back now April/May and start/mid June were horrendous times . Places deserted, ques for supermarkets and general grim times

Since the 29th June life started to go bright away but we're after hitting a roadblock. Phase 4 needs to begin on the 10th Aug and let people enjoy the rest of the summer before schools go back

Christmas will fly in

average_runner · 01-08-2020 6:38pm

Cant see pubs opening, if anything a step back could happen. Numbers are increasing and there is a growing number where we don't where they are coming from

01-08-2020 6:57pm

average_runner wrote: »

Cant see pubs opening, if anything a step back could happen. Numbers are increasing and there is a growing number where we don't where they are coming from

If that’s the case I’d be expecting the government to shell out big money to ensure those businesses and their staff stay afloat while been forced to close for probably 6 months and god knows how much longer.

Wondering were the money is coming from as it is.

I shudder to think what the bill will be!

average_runner · 01-08-2020 7:13pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If that’s the case I’d be expecting the government to shell out big money to ensure those businesses and their staff stay afloat while been forced to close for probably 6 months and god knows how much longer.

Wondering were the money is coming from as it is.

I shudder to think what the bill will be!

Pubs that serve food were getting quieter last week.

We will pay the bill, sure nothing new and as I pay the higher bracket and it will hit us more but that's ok

Arghus · 01-08-2020 8:01pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I do find it curious that numbers are increasing when that’s the only thing that has changed.

No, the really big thing that has changed is that there are now more people out and about. That's the big reason numbers are increasing - more people=more interactions=more chance for the virus to spread.

average_runner · 01-08-2020 8:08pm

Arghus wrote: »

No, the really big thing that has changed is that there are now more people out and about. That's the big reason numbers are increasing - more people=more interactions=more chance for the virus to spread.

The main worry is some people aren't stepping forward to get the test or self isolating.

Our neighbour is a taxi driver and even if pubs open he wont go back, that's the feeling from alot he said.

PTH2009 · 01-08-2020 9:12pm

At the start of the year you'd laugh and call someone a lunatic if they suggested that for summer 2020 people would be wearing masks and that medical professionals would be dressed like something from a post apocalyptic film

John O.Groats · 01-08-2020 9:25pm

PTH2009 wrote: »

At the start of the year you'd laugh and call someone a lunatic if they suggested that for summer 2020 people would be wearing masks and that medical professionals would be dressed like something from a post apocalyptic film

Well it`s the new normal and is likely to stay the same for the next 6 to 9 months at a minimum so best get used to it.

01-08-2020 9:47pm

John O.Groats wrote: »

Well it`s the new normal and is likely to stay the same for the next 6 to 9 months at a minimum so best get used to it.

Think we’ll be out of resources long before that.

road_high · 01-08-2020 9:51pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Think we’ll be out of resources long before that.

The government seem desperate to get as many off welfare as humanly possible- now, there in lies a big conflict. You can’t have this “new normal” stuff with big swathes of the economy shuttered or under constant threat of being shut down without a massive welfare programme to support it.

01-08-2020 9:58pm

road_high wrote: »

The government seem desperate to get as many off welfare as humanly possible- now, there in lies a big conflict. You can’t have this “new normal” stuff with big swathes of the economy shuttered or under constant threat of being shut down without a massive welfare programme to support it.

What are the big swathes of the economy that are being shuttered? Expect for non-food pubs and entertainment? Fundamentally there is enough resource with what is operating at the moment to keep those impacted by those industries on welfare for a good few months more

road_high · 01-08-2020 10:05pm

Deleted User wrote: »

What are the big swathes of the economy that are being shuttered. Expect for non-food pubs and entertainment? Fundamentally there is enough resource with what is operating at the moment to keep those impacted by those industries on welfare

Travel and tourism- absolutely massive chunks of our economy. Not to mention events, weddings, shows. Open your eyes for gods sake. Just because most things are open on Main Street does not mean the economy more generally is operating at anything like normal. There a bit of a domestic bounce going on at the moment, but that won’t last.
The spin off jobs from the airline industry are huge in Ireland right down to leasing, aircraft maintenance and components. Anyone who thinks the rest of the economy can keep these going indefinitely is frankly in la la land. I won’t be surprised to see lay offs in places where you’d never see them before

01-08-2020 10:09pm

road_high wrote: »

Travel and tourism- absolutely massive chunks of our economy. Not to mention events, weddings, shows. Open your eyes for gods sake. Just because most things are open on Main Street does not mean the economy more generally is operating at anything like normal. There a bit of a domestic bounce going on at the moment, but that won’t last.
The spin off jobs from the airline industry are huge in Ireland right down to leasing, aircraft maintenance and components. Anyone who thinks the rest of the economy can keep these going indefinitely is frankly in la la land. I won’t be surprised to see lay offs in places where you’d never see them before

Main Street is operating. Wall Street is operating, albeit from workers' living rooms. Domestic tourism is booming. You are talking about stuff around the edges.

01-08-2020 10:12pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What are the big swathes of the economy that are being shuttered? Expect for non-food pubs and entertainment? Fundamentally there is enough resource with what is operating at the moment to keep those impacted by those industries on welfare for a good few months more

Pubs, clubs and entire entertainment industry. That’s a LOT of people. Also the airlines and the entire tourism sector.

Retail was closed for several months and is still not back fully. Restrictions on numbers in shops, masks, visors, no changing rooms = less customers.

Same issues for restaurants and pubs acting as restaurants. Social distancing etc equals less customers and sales down.

The CMO is saying tonight that restaurants should only have 50 people including staff.

Lots of office workers support these industries in some way, shape or form and will eventually be impacted. Some have already gotten pay cuts.

Difficult to see how the whole thing won’t eventually collapse.

01-08-2020 10:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Pubs, clubs and entire entertainment industry. That’s a LOT of people. Also the airlines and the entire tourism sector.

Retail was closed for several months and is still not back fully. Restrictions on numbers in shops, masks, visors, no changing rooms = less customers.

Same issues for restaurants and pubs acting as restaurants. Social distancing etc equals less customers and sales down.

The CMO is saying tonight that restaurants should only have 50 people including staff.

Lots of office workers support these industries in some way, shape or form and will eventually be impacted. Some have already gotten pay cuts.

Difficult to see how the whole thing won’t eventually collapse.

I dont disagree with you. But that is different to saying that "vast swathes of the economy are shuttered". I believe that we have the resources to deliver social welfare to those impacted by what you describe, well into next year

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

Comments

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