Re: Coronavirus - Strange times
Posted: Sat 31 Oct, 2020 15.11
LOCKDOWN!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54762048
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54762048
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.
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 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 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.
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?Alexia wrote: ↑Sat 07 Nov, 2020 23.01I 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 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!
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.
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.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!
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.cwathen wrote: ↑Sun 20 Dec, 2020 19.38Yes 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.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!
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').