Coronavirus - Strange times

JAS84
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10.23
Location: Hull, UK

JAS84
Posts: 476
Joined: Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10.23
Location: Hull, UK

Shouldn't that lockdown mean non-essential retailers have to close? Why, then, is Max Spielmann still open? They're a photography shop, they're non-essential.
bilky asko
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48

JAS84 wrote: Sat 07 Nov, 2020 13.57 Shouldn't that lockdown mean non-essential retailers have to close? Why, then, is Max Spielmann still open? They're a photography shop, they're non-essential.
Do they offer essential services? Being part of the Timpson group, if they offer (for example) dry cleaning, that is classed as essential and they can remain open.
Image
Alexia
Posts: 2976
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

cwathen wrote: Tue 27 Oct, 2020 20.34 Really? That's reality Will. Its not always pleasant. The fact that we've escalated anything that might cause a Covid death up to the level of being tantamount to genocide and which must be protected against at any cost, whilst writing off the damage being caused in that pursuit as being an unfortunate secondary concern irrespective of the fact that it will (and undoubtedly has) caused unnecessary death is the grimmest thing I've ever experienced society do in my life, never mind this bloody forum!
I will treat anyone who doesn't wear a mask or social distance the same way I will treat someone who is knowingly HIV+ who refuses to wear a condom. With contempt, disdain and disgust.
cwathen
Posts: 1168
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

Alexia wrote: Sat 07 Nov, 2020 23.01 I will treat anyone who doesn't wear a mask or social distance the same way I will treat someone who is knowingly HIV+ who refuses to wear a condom. With contempt, disdain and disgust.
I think there is a huge gulf between being anti mask and anti lockdown and to claim otherwise is a ridiculous over-simplification of the argument.

I have doubts as to how effective masks really are, but I'll still wear one and will carry on wearing one for as long as is necessary. Ultimately if they turn out to have been a waste of time, no harm will have been done. I will also practice reasonable social distancing in terms of giving space. Both of these measures are proportionate. But I can do that and still believe that stronger measures are disproportionately damaging and shouldn't be pursued.

As is sadly the case all too often now, society seems to feel the need to dumb everything down to two all or nothing viewpoints. Hence people who don't believe in lockdowns are too often being painted as anti-mask conspiracy theorist Covid-deniers who are little better than murderers by those who support strong restrictions. I don't doubt the same biases exist in the other direction. As ever, reality is far more nuanced than that.
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

Alexia wrote: Sat 07 Nov, 2020 23.01
cwathen wrote: Tue 27 Oct, 2020 20.34 Really? That's reality Will. Its not always pleasant. The fact that we've escalated anything that might cause a Covid death up to the level of being tantamount to genocide and which must be protected against at any cost, whilst writing off the damage being caused in that pursuit as being an unfortunate secondary concern irrespective of the fact that it will (and undoubtedly has) caused unnecessary death is the grimmest thing I've ever experienced society do in my life, never mind this bloody forum!
I will treat anyone who doesn't wear a mask or social distance the same way I will treat someone who is knowingly HIV+ who refuses to wear a condom. With contempt, disdain and disgust.
Can't we just be nice to one another? Respect one-and-other's anxieties, accept that sometimes distancing isn't easy or is easy to forget and the same applies to mask-wearing?

Seeing the whole world in such a binary fashion isn't good.
Image
thegeek
Posts: 639
Joined: Sat 04 Jun, 2005 12.35

Having not made any big plans for Christmas, I'm not too disappointed about not being able to go anywhere or have anyone over. Sucks that they got everyone's hopes up only to dash them - especially given the grim inevitability of it all.
gottago
Posts: 191
Joined: Thu 29 Jan, 2009 19.50

thegeek wrote: Sat 19 Dec, 2020 21.24 Having not made any big plans for Christmas, I'm not too disappointed about not being able to go anywhere or have anyone over. Sucks that they got everyone's hopes up only to dash them - especially given the grim inevitability of it all.
It seems very odd that they promised 5 days of relaxed rules about a month before Christmas. We've all seen how last minute the spread and the rule changes have been all year, it was obvious there was going to some sort of change. But why not just promise Christmas Day with the possibility of expanding that to extra days? The sheer disappointment from people online is kind of incredible, it feels like this is the most miserable people have been since this sorry year began.
tightrope78
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri 27 Feb, 2015 15.35

Desperately sad times. You can’t help but feel sympathetic for those that this affects. My mum and dad (who are in their seventies) decided months ago that they would have lunch themselves and me and then my sister and her family would visit for very short periods of time to exchange gifts etc. it just seemed like the most sensible thing to do. For reference I have saw my sister for 45 minutes since March despite the fact we both work in the same organisation and we live relatively close to each other. As a family we are doing everything to make sure my parents stay safe.

I can't help but feel though that this whole saga is a repeat of the travel corridors chaos. People have made plans despite knowing that they could be changed at a moments notice. Common sense was not applied in the first place! just like everything this year just because the government say you can do something (for now) doesn't mean you should have done it!
cwathen
Posts: 1168
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

tightrope78 wrote: Sun 20 Dec, 2020 19.09 I can't help but feel though that this whole saga is a repeat of the travel corridors chaos. People have made plans despite knowing that they could be changed at a moments notice. Common sense was not applied in the first place! just like everything this year just because the government say you can do something (for now) doesn't mean you should have done it!
Yes but where does that all end? By that mantra the best policy is to lock yourself away until the situation is deemed to have improved, but the judgement as to when that is will be set by the same government which says you can do things then takes them away again...so how do you know when it is 'safe'? If we're going for 'Common sense', then frankly common sense dictates that if 99.9% of the population isn't at risk of death from 'the virus' and if almost all of those that are have serious underlying health conditions that were going to kill them anyway then actually the common sense approach is to admit at this point that we need to just get on with it and accept that people will die because the price of trying to save the dying from death cannot be justified against the damage and further loss of life being done in the process - which is exactly the attitude that was taken during the last global pandemic. It was far deadlier than Covid is ever likely to be yet it is barely a footnote in history because it was never allowed to become the obsession that Covid has.

Personally, I'm going ahead with exactly what I had planned to do (which - as far as I'm aware - is legal but may be 'against advice').
tightrope78
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri 27 Feb, 2015 15.35

cwathen wrote: Sun 20 Dec, 2020 19.38
tightrope78 wrote: Sun 20 Dec, 2020 19.09 I can't help but feel though that this whole saga is a repeat of the travel corridors chaos. People have made plans despite knowing that they could be changed at a moments notice. Common sense was not applied in the first place! just like everything this year just because the government say you can do something (for now) doesn't mean you should have done it!
Yes but where does that all end? By that mantra the best policy is to lock yourself away until the situation is deemed to have improved, but the judgement as to when that is will be set by the same government which says you can do things then takes them away again...so how do you know when it is 'safe'? If we're going for 'Common sense', then frankly common sense dictates that if 99.9% of the population isn't at risk of death from 'the virus' and if almost all of those that are have serious underlying health conditions that were going to kill them anyway then actually the common sense approach is to admit at this point that we need to just get on with it and accept that people will die because the price of trying to save the dying from death cannot be justified against the damage and further loss of life being done in the process - which is exactly the attitude that was taken during the last global pandemic. It was far deadlier than Covid is ever likely to be yet it is barely a footnote in history because it was never allowed to become the obsession that Covid has.

Personally, I'm going ahead with exactly what I had planned to do (which - as far as I'm aware - is legal but may be 'against advice').
What I did not mention is that I am 42 and was diagnosed with asthma last year, my GP said I had the lungs of someone in my mid seventies (I have never smoked a day in my life and exercise 5 times a week). Rather selfishly I don't want to catch it myself as there is a strong chance it would affect me badly.

I'm not here to get into discussions with someone who has a diametrically opposed viewpoint to the one I have, that is clearly a waste of time.

Have a good Christmas doing whatever you want. I know I'll still have a good one.
Please Respond