Coronavirus

[bazil85]

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Yes, let's blindly hope that the thing we have been doing for months up to this point which has STILL resulted in an exponential growth of cases suddenly starts to actually work after months of failure.

That sounds like a plan.

Note to self, what's the definition of madness again???

Are you assuming they haven't made any difference at all? Utter nonsense. 

[Hendo]

36 minutes ago, Yflab said:

Do you have a relevant link?

His Twitter account is johnrashton47 - most of his writings on it are on there. He's the guy that was ridiculed on Question Time back in March for having a go at the government for their shambolic response - of course he has been proved right. He, of course, was of a different political allegiance from the government so wasnt listened to.

[bazil85]

10 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

So, coming from the guy who laughed at previous numbers now grabbing a number that seems to be out on it's own? 

Aye, ok, I'll, as I've always done, stick with Worldometer, currently showing 45, 365.

As I said above, 100k by the end of the year.......................gies piece. 

 

Hope not (your view that people get excited about deaths as a way to win arguments is not a common one believe it or not) The increasing trends that you clearly (still) don't understand means we shouldn't be complacent though. 

[Bud the Baker]

31 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

So, coming from the guy who laughed at previous numbers now grabbing a number that seems to be out on it's own? 

Aye, ok, I'll, as I've always done, stick with Worldometer, currently showing 45, 365.

As I said above, 100k by the end of the year.......................gies piece. 

I said the government compiling three different sets of figures was a mess. pointed out that the results for the 4 countries were not in sync, the count being inconsistent on a daily basis as well as noting the embarrassing revisions that occurred and was correct in all these positions, however the 60,000 came from one set of the government's figures as compiled by the ONS  - based on the "within 28 days of a positive test" criteria. 

Furthermore based on today's ONS figure, the trend in cases recorded and the 3/4 week lag in deaths the ONS total will be closer to 100k than it seemed a couple of months back despite your sneering gammon analysis.

***************************

You can chose another count which suits you better, after all that's what stats is about! 

Oh, and I still put "the bulk of the blame" on the combined governments. 

Edited October 27, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[Tommy]

Nah, no phoning in sick, no self certificates, doctor's line only.
 
OK, don't cut benefit, make them do 7 days a week until they catch up with the hours they missed.  No double shifts allowed.
 
To me, the reason most of the lifetime unemployed (not talking about medical issues here, just lazy cunts) do it as they have all the time to themselves (except once a fortnight to sign on) and taking that away would be the biggest disincentive to them, not taking money.
 
I never said it was THE answer to the problem, it was just MY answer.

Get a doc line [emoji23] aye if you can get an appointment to start with [emoji23] I would rather gov would put more efforts into helping people that want to work rather than waste time and effort trying to force people who dont want to work. As I said, there is no answer to the problem.

[faraway saint]

5 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

I said the government compiling three different sets of figures was a mess. pointed out that the results for the 4 countries were not in sync, the count being inconsistent on a daily basis as well as noting the embarrassing revisions that occurred and was correct in all these positions, however the 60,000 came from one set of the government's figures as compiled by the ONS  - based on the "within 28 days of a positive test" criteria. 

Furthermore based on today's ONS figure, the trend in cases recorded and the 3/4 week lag in deaths the ONS total will be closer to 100k than it seemed a couple of months back despite your sneering analysis. You can chose another count which suits you better, after all that's what stats is about! 

Oh, and I still put "the bulk of the blame" on the combined governments. 

I'm not choosing anything other than the stats I have always used,

You, on the other hand, have a habit of jumping/scraping around to find anything that suits your political agenda.

Right or wrong, I've been using the same source throughout. 

100k. 

PS Sneering? I'm saying what I think, not hiding behind mibbies and could be's, unlike you and plenty of others. 

Edited October 27, 2020 by faraway saint

[Ayrshire Saints]

Your auto-correct is having a bit of fun but I think I get the point you are making.
£450 is still only £37.50 per month so it's not a massive monthly bill and won't explain why these people can't afford food. I suspect most unemployed people are probably not living in band D houses so it should be lower than that it most cases.

You'd be surprised especially just now. Your average 3 bed Council or ex Council house is generally Band C or D.
I haven't followed this strand of the thread too closely but I take it this is about the free (out of) school meals issue. If so it's not really your average family on benefits this affects, yes some genuinely will have money issues leading to child holiday hunger due to problems within the welfare system but it's more the kids living in problem households and surviving on benefits mostly addiction be that drink, drugs or gambling or a combination there of. Those kids live through hell through no fault of their own and there are millions of them in the UK unfortunately. A little (and its tiny) help to feed those kids an actual meal rather than handing the cash to the addicted parents is surely not too much to ask of any govt ?

[Bud the Baker]

17 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I'm not choosing anything other than the stats I have always used,

You, on the other hand, have a habit of jumping/scraping around to find anything that suits your political agenda.

Right or wrong, I've been using the same source throughout. 

100k. 

I'm saying what I've said from the get-go that the governments stats are a mess - that's my agenda.

In typical gammon fashion you're choosing the lowest set of results - that's your agenda,

I was merely pointing out that according to the ONS data published today and current trends continue we'll be closer to the 100k figure that we all dismissed a coupla months back and that'll largely be down to complacency at the top. "where the bulk of the blame lies ". I tried to delete it because I didn't want to get into another one of these tedious arguments - alas just a bit too late.

The coming months are going to be scary and frankly I'd be happy if you're proved correct, I'm just not so sure that you will be.

Edited October 27, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[Bud the Baker]

21 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I'm not choosing anything other than the stats I have always used,

You, on the other hand, have a habit of jumping/scraping around to find anything that suits your political agenda.

Right or wrong, I've been using the same source throughout. 

100k. 

PS Sneering? I'm saying what I think, not hiding behind mibbies and could be's, unlike you and plenty of others. 

Well I'm sure you'll be able to put a bet on it somewhere - but on what set of figures?.

Edited October 27, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[ALBIONSAINT]

1 hour ago, Hendo said:

John Ashton is a former director of public health - he is worth listening to on this and is absolutely not a conspiracy theorist.

Things haven’t changed much with the public since the Middle Ages, during the current crisis it’s lizard people and elites that drink baby’s blood, back then it was witches and black magic, the more things change the more they stay the same. 

[ALBIONSAINT]

31 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

You'd be surprised especially just now. Your average 3 bed Council or ex Council house is generally Band C or D.
I haven't followed this strand of the thread too closely but I take it this is about the free (out of) school meals issue. If so it's not really your average family on benefits this affects, yes some genuinely will have money issues leading to child holiday hunger due to problems within the welfare system but it's more the kids living in problem households and surviving on benefits mostly addiction be that drink, drugs or gambling or a combination there of. Those kids live through hell through no fault of their own and there are millions of them in the UK unfortunately. A little (and its tiny) help to feed those kids an actual meal rather than handing the cash to the addicted parents is surely not too much to ask of any govt ?

Great post 👍🏻 It’s not just about the money, it gives education/ council staff the opportunity to do a welfare check with the children and provide a listening ear in case they need further help or support. 

[bazil85]

52 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I'm not choosing anything other than the stats I have always used,

You, on the other hand, have a habit of jumping/scraping around to find anything that suits your political agenda.

Right or wrong, I've been using the same source throughout. 

100k. 

PS Sneering? I'm saying what I think, not hiding behind mibbies and could be's, unlike you and plenty of others. 

Because no one completely knows what it'll look like in a couple months, ffs is that not obvious? 

[Ayrshire Saints]

Great post [emoji1303] It’s not just about the money, it gives education/ council staff the opportunity to do a welfare check with the children and provide a listening ear in case they need further help or support. 

I find the UKG line on this baffling given the relatively small amount of money it would cost and the backlash against their current stance. Whilst Rashford should be applauded for bringing the issue into the public domain I can't help but think it's his involvement that is entrenching the Tory position, not wanting to be seen to have been outed by a young footballer. I hope not and they do rethink it but the more they pull up the drawbridge the less likely that becomes. At least devolved administrations and the private / third sectors are pledging support although that will suit the UKG down to the ground.

 

[Slarti]

 

 

 

Get a doc line [emoji23] aye if you can get an appointment to start with [emoji23] I would rather gov would put more efforts into helping people that want to work rather than waste time and effort trying to force people who dont want to work. As I said, there is no answer to the problem.

 

That should discourage them from pulling sickies then. [emoji38]

 

 

Firing squad?

 

[Tommy]

39 minutes ago, Slarti said:

 

 

 

 

 

That should discourage them from pulling sickies then.

 

 

Firing squad?

 

Being force to watch Morton would be better  

[jaybee]

8 hours ago, God of war said:

Do u realise ur a fanny?

But of course it takes a cnut; to recognise a fanny.

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, jaybee said:

But of course it takes a cnut; to recognise a fanny.

U would know then ya toolbag!

[Guest]

6 hours ago, bazil85 said:

What a conclusion to come to after only one month on BAWA... 

If you don't like it, don't get involved, easy solution. 

Seriously do u perceive yourself as an interesting poster on here?

[jaybee]

7 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Nope I'm not having a 🦒 and I never said the government was entirely to blame but I still say they must bear "the bulk of the blame" for the reasons given above - is it any wonder mask wearing is not universally upheld in the country when it took the government down south over two months between easing lockdown restrictions before introducing limited & insufficient face mask rules which had to be augmented in September which in itself was another inadequate measure as he should have been prepping us for tougher Tier restrictions that he had to do a month later. 

The government down south moved into lockout too late, and when they started to come out continuously downplayed the seriousness of the situation, failed to deliver on promises and BJ personally shattered the "we're all in it together" mood of the country by supporting his favourite SPAD who had lied in print about where he spent isolation before going into the comedy business with his Barnard Castle routine.

Everyone has to look at their behaviour over this period but I maintain "the bulk of the blame" lies with the government.

**************************

It's less than a month since your fellow gammons were saying that the number of cases didn't really matter if the death rate remained low... 

...the next few months are going to be scary!

The government down south have got larger and slightly more urgent problems to deal with relative to the self inflicted problems of Scotland or Wales and that includes Covid 19 as well as other issues.   For my expressions of those views I have no doubt I shall get slated, but that does not make them any the less factual. BJ like him or otherwise (and I was never a big fan) has at least followed the democratic wishes of the people in the UK and did more about Brexit than let us just say the previous encumbant.  Scotland and the remainers here have been of no help and the wee gormless lassie that runs the SNP just wants her European Mammy. I would say that both of these actions are at odds with democracy, or do we only advocate that when it suits us or supports our points of view. 

As for who is to blame re lockdowns etc? I cannot argue with the Covid facts and things could have and perhaps should have been better, quicker, more effective, but hindsight is always so very very useful a tool for those who wish to denegrate those who had to actually deal with things the way they were and yes as far as the current resurgence of Covid cases; I blame the people who fail to follow common sense procedures more that someone who is doing their very best to try and keep the Country viable.  Additionally I have no idea what  "your fellow gammons" allude to but have a feeling it probably isn't complimentary, I really don't care.

[oaksoft]

5 hours ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

You'd be surprised especially just now. Your average 3 bed Council or ex Council house is generally Band C or D.
I haven't followed this strand of the thread too closely but I take it this is about the free (out of) school meals issue. If so it's not really your average family on benefits this affects, yes some genuinely will have money issues leading to child holiday hunger due to problems within the welfare system but it's more the kids living in problem households and surviving on benefits mostly addiction be that drink, drugs or gambling or a combination there of. Those kids live through hell through no fault of their own and there are millions of them in the UK unfortunately. A little (and its tiny) help to feed those kids an actual meal rather than handing the cash to the addicted parents is surely not too much to ask of any govt ?

Yes, it's about the school meals issue.

I think your comment about problem households is very persuasive because for the life of me I can't fathom out how a lack of money itself can possibly be causing such a massive problem. A few thousand cases maybe, but not millions of cases.

I agree with that last sentence. Punishing kids for their parents problems is just unforgiveable in my opinion.

[oaksoft]

5 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Are you assuming they haven't made any difference at all? Utter nonsense. 

If masks and social distancing worked, why are we seeing an exponential rise in cases after months of compliance by the vast majority of the population?

[faraway saint]

8 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

I'm saying what I've said from the get-go that the governments stats are a mess - that's my agenda.

In typical gammon fashion you're choosing the lowest set of results - that's your agenda,

I was merely pointing out that according to the ONS data published today and current trends continue we'll be closer to the 100k figure that we all dismissed a coupla months back and that'll largely be down to complacency at the top. "where the bulk of the blame lies ". I tried to delete it because I didn't want to get into another one of these tedious arguments - alas just a bit too late.

The coming months are going to be scary and frankly I'd be happy if you're proved correct, I'm just not so sure that you will be.

I've ALWAYS used the same source of information, nice attempt to drag me into your games but, you lose. 

Funny, you seem to be, again, pointing the finger at the government yet a doctor (who will I trust, a baker or a doctor) has just reiterated the numbers depend very much on how we behave................."The big impact is going to be how we behave, how we stick to the rules, keep doing simple things, masks, hand washing, social distancing....................that will have a BIG impact"

Aye, the coming months are a concern, just weird how you think 100k could happen(the usual caveat thrown in as a smokescreen), I don't. 

PS I see the forum simpleton is in your camp, that'll do for me. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by faraway saint

[faraway saint]

8 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

Well I'm sure you'll be able to put a bet on it somewhere - but on what set of figures?.

Let's, to keep it simple, split the difference and say the numbers are 50,000 now.

That would need an AVERAGE of just UNDER 800 a day, EVERY day, even the days the stattos are having a much needed sleep. 

Now, if you think that's possible you really have lost the plot. 

[faraway saint]

3 hours ago, oaksoft said:

If masks and social distancing worked, why are we seeing an exponential rise in cases after months of compliance by the vast majority of the population?

Police Scotland broke up about 300 house parties last month.

That's just the ones they knew about. 

Aye, compliance by the majority but it only takes an ever growing minority to feck it up for us all. 

[Ayrshire Saints]

Yes, it's about the school meals issue.
I think your comment about problem households is very persuasive because for the life of me I can't fathom out how a lack of money itself can possibly be causing such a massive problem. A few thousand cases maybe, but not millions of cases.
I agree with that last sentence. Punishing kids for their parents problems is just unforgiveable in my opinion.

The millions is kids living with addicted parents estimated to be between 1.2 and 1.8m in the UK last figs I saw. I would think the vast majority experiencing the issue fall into that category. The gambling category is exploding and unfortunately that is often unknown to authorities. People associated problem gambling with a father blowing the pay packet at the bookies but now it's just as likely to be a mother gambling on her mobile device via online bingo and casino sites.