|
Nov 2020
2:05pm, 2 Nov 2020
12,109 posts
|
geordiegirl
Basing the decision on getting money is sure my not ethical but then the money if available now should be available if/when needed. It’s all a mess.
Fingers crossed for you HP
|
|
Nov 2020
2:21pm, 2 Nov 2020
826 posts
|
Spideog
There is far more sense in locking down in order to obtain financial support than there is to lockdown in order to give the impression of doing something as you are out of ideas but can't admit it.
England can't figure out what to do, so lets lockdown and ruin businesses, jobs, peoples health and mental health which will ruin the economy and in order to get people to comply with something we've not specified very well we'll give some of them some money.
Scotland brought in some restrictions which mostly still ruin peoples jobs and businesses but hasn't got the financial clout to pay people to stop working though so stops short of that. But when the magic money tree sprouts a new branch it would be foolish of them not to grab hold of that branch if it just requires a tiny tweak to the restrictions.
|
|
Nov 2020
2:27pm, 2 Nov 2020
19,867 posts
|
EvilPixie
spiedog unfortunately we are in a no win situation
Lockdown and save lives from covid or release things save the economy but loads of covid deaths
|
|
Nov 2020
2:30pm, 2 Nov 2020
21,217 posts
|
Dvorak
I have a question which would go to you, Spideog, and all others who are anti "lockdown" as it will "ruin businesses, jobs, peoples health and mental health".
What would you do?
Not asking for a fully-fleshed out plan here, nor a slate of detailed recommendations, just a general course of action.
|
|
Nov 2020
2:53pm, 2 Nov 2020
827 posts
|
Spideog
It's balancing the lives and livelihoods lost due to lockdowns compared to some lives lost due to covid though, and it would seem that it's a futile battle to be trying to eliminate it. If there are 10,000+ deaths weekly anyway, then is destroying the economy and the education of an entire generation and the impact that will then have for decades to come worth it for the sake of 11,000+* people dying each week instead?
Lockdown was required in March/ April/ May and made a massive difference, could have been done better, but it did what it meant to do. Partial lockdowns now do nothing but destroy the economy and peoples lives through other ways with no real change to the number of deaths from Covid.
* Have just taken a guestimate of 52k covid deaths for the year and divided by 52. Not meant to be an accurate calculation or prediction, just to show that despite the current number of covid deaths being huge, it is still only a fraction in terms of the normal death rate from all causes.
|
|
Nov 2020
2:54pm, 2 Nov 2020
1,983 posts
|
Cheg
Bring back shielding for the vulnerable. Really look at that list and mandate them to stay home.
Big ad campaign for the over 70's to only mix if absolutely necessary. Perhaps one approved visitor.
I have a relative in a care home and he has had no visitors, his wife nothing. For months.
Much stricter enforcement of self isolation. 11% is diabolical.
Can Test and Trace be rescued? I think we have missed the boat on this.
The costs of a lockdown aren't being properly measured or ignored. There are financial costs in terms of redundancies, but more the undiagnosed cancer, heart and other conditions and the related deaths from that.
|
|
Nov 2020
2:57pm, 2 Nov 2020
19,873 posts
|
EvilPixie
cheg mum hasn't stepped inside a shop since Feb
I've seen her twice
she was still grieving the lose of dad so shielding has destroyed her (covid would kill her)
at least in a care home there are the staff and other residents
mum sees the postman and delivery man both from a distance
no one has been inside the house since feb - even I didn't go inside
|
|
Nov 2020
2:59pm, 2 Nov 2020
2,943 posts
|
Tim of Fife
Individual voters are entitled to question government policy. That's what democracy is all about. That doesn't mean that those voters have to come up with solutions. That's what governments are for. (Similar with football fans and managers lol).
However, if you were to ask me personally, I think that there is mileage in giving Scotland's five level strategy time to work. Of course it relies on compliance (not least in not travelling between levels). But then so does a total lockdown.
|
|
Nov 2020
3:06pm, 2 Nov 2020
2,944 posts
|
Tim of Fife
Evil Pixie
My dad is 95. He has a bit more face-to-face contact than your mum (eg fortnightly cleaner, socially distancedd drop-ins from my sister). But effectively, he is in isolation.
Society has decreed that this is the right thing to do for him, so that his life isn't put in danger. But he has no life as he'd recognise it.
|
|
Nov 2020
3:08pm, 2 Nov 2020
28,682 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
I believe you have all hit the nail on the head, it is compliance, and people bending the 'rules' where ever and who ever they are to suit their situation, it's people now, not government. This lockdown will not work, the Welsh circuitbreaker/firebreak/whatev, will not work either, time will show us that, because there are just enough people, behaving just incorrectly enough to fuck it up.
I have not seen my dad since Feb, it's the correct thing to do.
Also, watch out for the massive spike 2/3 weeks after universities shut for Christmas and the mass of infected students go home. They'll be another lockdown of sorts, mid/end of Jan.
|
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022