Jump to content

faraway saint

Coronavirus

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

Indeed.

Every day/week that passes their will be more "rule breaking" and the economic impact will see the end of many business's in this critical period for many.

What happened to the Scottish government "leading the way"? 

The UK government were criticised for missing the boat in utilising the October school holidays and here "we" are in mid November possibly increasing restrictions? 

 

 

In what way are the Scottish government not leading the way? - - Seems like the infection rates are lower in Scotland 

- we have more freedoms in Scotland than pretty much anywhere else in the U.K. 

- Scottish government can only do so much to stop rule breaking same as anywhere else 

- borrowing powers to support people and business aren’t devolved. 

what more would you actually like to see? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:
3 hours ago, bazil85 said:
Only a matter of time, can see many parts of Scotland going level 4 before things get better. A real worry for Christmas but the nations health should and will come first. 

The "leaking" of T4 imminence is creating rule breaking. I had to go into work today and while waiting at Ayr the train from Glasgow became my train home. There was upwards of 50 passengers loaded with bags and packages clearly from Glasgow shops which I can only assume is people deciding to ditch the no travel in out rule to get Christmas shopping done ahead of any T4 closure. If they are moving LAs to T4 then do it and stop just talking about it. The closer to December the bigger negative economic impact.

It’s a fine line to balance, there is no solution that won’t see the Scottish (or any other government) get criticised by some people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

A move into T4 is absolutely beyond moronic at this time of the year. The social, mental, financial negative impact of shutting an entire country down in the run up to Christmas will far outstrip any positives.

Only potentially economically, for many that is secondary to human life.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

I know this has been said before but you are wasting your time. 

He see's things in very simplistic terms. 

It's "deaths", no matter the number, outweigh anything else, end of debate. 

 

You can’t see by your own view, my post and subsequent posts have been no more than a balanced opinion that I hold. 
 

You and some others believe that unless someone changes their mind to agree with you, they’re being unreasonable. It’s ridiculous 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

Only potentially economically, for many that is secondary to human life.  

Like it or not, economic factors have a direct correlation to human life.

Just because the lives it affects aren't lives that may be ended directly by the virus, doesn't mean that they are in any way secondary.

Tell the small clothes shop owner that being forced to close down mid November, potentially until January that it's 'only an economic' issue that means they'll have no means of income for a minimum of 6 weeks at what would be their busiest time of year.

Tell the sole trading hair salon, barber, beautician or nail bar that had adhered to the rules to an absolute 'T', that they now cannot trade at a time of year where they would be their busiest and now have to close up, despite spending their own money to ensure that a thorough distancing and cleaning process is in place and they are working a very strict one in one out policy. But the fact that they now cannot trade through no fault of their own and despite there being no evidence of  their industries being a factor in the spread....tell them it's 'only potentially an economy issue' when they are sitting pratted, worrying how they pay rent, keeps things running, bills paid at a time of the year where even in normal times, suicide rates skyrocket.

Economy isn't secondary to human life, it's a massively integral part of human life. Finance, or lack of it is one of the absolute largest factors in mental health issues and suicide. It's naive at best to suggest that T4 restrictions at this time of the year is only going to have an econmical downside and there won't be any human downside directly tied to that.

 

Edited by djchapsticks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

You can’t see by your own view, my post and subsequent posts have been no more than a balanced opinion that I hold. 
 

You and some others believe that unless someone changes their mind to agree with you, they’re being unreasonable. It’s ridiculous 

You are one to talk, FFS. :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

You are one to talk, FFS. :lol: 

I can understand the economic view, I just don't share it for numerous reasons, some of which I'll go into in the next post. This is the issue people like FS has like I say. If you don't change to agree with them 100% that somehow means you don't understand. :whistle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, djchapsticks said:

Like it or not, economic factors have a direct correlation to human life.

Just because the lives it affects aren't lives that may be ended directly by the virus, doesn't mean that they are in any way secondary.

Tell the small clothes shop owner that being forced to close down mid November, potentially until January that it's 'only an economic' issue that means they'll have no means of income for a minimum of 6 weeks at what would be their busiest time of year.

Tell the sole trading hair salon, barber, beautician or nail bar that had adhered to the rules to an absolute 'T', that they now cannot trade at a time of year where they would be their busiest and now have to close up, despite spending their own money to ensure that a thorough distancing and cleaning process is in place and they are working a very strict one in one out policy. But the fact that they now cannot trade through no fault of their own and despite there being no evidence of  their industries being a factor in the spread....tell them it's 'only potentially an economy issue' when they are sitting pratted, worrying how they pay rent, keeps things running, bills paid at a time of the year where even in normal times, suicide rates skyrocket.

Economy isn't secondary to human life, it's a massively integral part of human life. Finance, or lack of it is one of the absolute largest factors in mental health issues and suicide. It's naive at best to suggest that T4 restrictions at this time of the year is only going to have an econmical downside and there won't be any human downside directly tied to that.

 

I'll stress first this is just my view and I appreciate yours is different but it has become ever more important to do this on BAWA because there remains a small few that just can't grasp the differences between understanding and sharing opinions/ facts (queue Slarti tears on that one).

For me economic issues are secondary because decisions should be made to protect business and livelihoods in the times of the pandemic. I flatly refuse to support any economic stance that ultimately says "we can't protect X without letting Y die of Covid19"

- Small shop owners, barbers beauticians, nail bars - protect their incomes until we are in a situation where we can come out of this, cover their rents, cover their bills, do whatever needs to be done. Pandemic or not, there is more than enough resources to protect people without opening the country up and letting the ever growing number of people dying getting even bigger. 

As for no evidence these businesses impact the spread, I simply disagree with that. I don't think it's likely at all. 

Mental health, emotional factors, suicide, my view is the same. Protect and support these people the best we can without dooming thousands (maybe more) to death when it's becoming more and more likely a vaccine is around the corner. 

I'm not nor have I ever been under any illusion there is a solution where everyone lives during this (despite Oakster claiming my view was otherwise then arrogantly claiming he educated me, a point that's been shown to be a lie under questioning) but I don't support opening the economy up as it's easier financially than the government stepping up far more to support. 

Back to the first point, this is JUST MY VIEW. I understand and appreciate there are others like yourself, I'm trying to be very balanced in this so no one will start crying over my post, it isn't a matter of understanding, it's just a matter of my priorities.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I'll stress first this is just my view and I appreciate yours is different but it has become ever more important to do this on BAWA because there remains a small few that just can't grasp the differences between understanding and sharing opinions/ facts (queue Slarti tears on that one).

For me economic issues are secondary because decisions should be made to protect business and livelihoods in the times of the pandemic. I flatly refuse to support any economic stance that ultimately says "we can't protect X without letting Y die of Covid19"

- Small shop owners, barbers beauticians, nail bars - protect their incomes until we are in a situation where we can come out of this, cover their rents, cover their bills, do whatever needs to be done. Pandemic or not, there is more than enough resources to protect people without opening the country up and letting the ever growing number of people dying getting even bigger. 

As for no evidence these businesses impact the spread, I simply disagree with that. I don't think it's likely at all. 

Mental health, emotional factors, suicide, my view is the same. Protect and support these people the best we can without dooming thousands (maybe more) to death when it's becoming more and more likely a vaccine is around the corner. 

I'm not nor have I ever been under any illusion there is a solution where everyone lives during this (despite Oakster claiming my view was otherwise then arrogantly claiming he educated me, a point that's been shown to be a lie under questioning) but I don't support opening the economy up as it's easier financially than the government stepping up far more to support. 

Back to the first point, this is JUST MY VIEW. I understand and appreciate there are others like yourself, I'm trying to be very balanced in this so no one will start crying over my post, it isn't a matter of understanding, it's just a matter of my priorities.  

I'm not quite sure where to start with this.

The concept of the government protecting people is nothing more than a quaint fantasy in a capitalist society and in a country run by a right wing government with a massive majority in Westminster or a nationalist government in Scotland who specialise in image management. There are millions of people who have slipped through the net, with no government support - a chef was on the news last week, started a new job on 8th March, laid off on the 19th, not eligible for any government support until May, which was less than a third of his usual wages. 

Or there's the newly self employed, no support for them. I was one of them - made £200 in April and May this year, and was just really lucky that I work in a job where it was relatively easy to get paid employment. Of course, the business is now as dead as a dodo, which might not have been the case if support was there.

And then we come to the rather dodgy ground that closing down businesses will reduce the spread. Now, if people were going to shops, hairdressers etc and licking each others faces, they may have a point. However, all these places are doing social distancing, insisting on face masks, etc, all the things we're told are essential to control the virus. So, if these measures are effective, why do businesses need closed down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hendo said:

I'm not quite sure where to start with this.

The concept of the government protecting people is nothing more than a quaint fantasy in a capitalist society and in a country run by a right wing government with a massive majority in Westminster or a nationalist government in Scotland who specialise in image management. There are millions of people who have slipped through the net, with no government support - a chef was on the news last week, started a new job on 8th March, laid off on the 19th, not eligible for any government support until May, which was less than a third of his usual wages. 

Or there's the newly self employed, no support for them. I was one of them - made £200 in April and May this year, and was just really lucky that I work in a job where it was relatively easy to get paid employment. Of course, the business is now as dead as a dodo, which might not have been the case if support was there.

And then we come to the rather dodgy ground that closing down businesses will reduce the spread. Now, if people were going to shops, hairdressers etc and licking each others faces, they may have a point. However, all these places are doing social distancing, insisting on face masks, etc, all the things we're told are essential to control the virus. So, if these measures are effective, why do businesses need closed down?

I completely agree with your first points and that is exactly the problem, this is what needs tackled. For me the way to tackle that is not to open the country up and cause the virus to spread more, just because the government aren't doing enough to support. 

As for the last, the measures in place are intended to mitigate, they will never fully curb the spread of the virus, if there was an easy reasonable way to stop the virus transmitting, businesses would do it. That's why additional restrictions are put in place, when the transmission is too much, more, harsher steps are taking to curb. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Hendo said:

I'm not quite sure where to start with this.

The concept of the government protecting people is nothing more than a quaint fantasy in a capitalist society and in a country run by a right wing government with a massive majority in Westminster or a nationalist government in Scotland who specialise in image management. There are millions of people who have slipped through the net, with no government support - a chef was on the news last week, started a new job on 8th March, laid off on the 19th, not eligible for any government support until May, which was less than a third of his usual wages. 

Or there's the newly self employed, no support for them. I was one of them - made £200 in April and May this year, and was just really lucky that I work in a job where it was relatively easy to get paid employment. Of course, the business is now as dead as a dodo, which might not have been the case if support was there.

And then we come to the rather dodgy ground that closing down businesses will reduce the spread. Now, if people were going to shops, hairdressers etc and licking each others faces, they may have a point. However, all these places are doing social distancing, insisting on face masks, etc, all the things we're told are essential to control the virus. So, if these measures are effective, why do businesses need closed down?

Key point, lost to both governments.

Again, I've mentioned plenty of times, lots of business's have gone above and beyond, not to say some haven't, yet get unfairly targeted with little evidence they contribute to the spread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Key point, lost to both governments.
Again, I've mentioned plenty of times, lots of business's have gone above and beyond, not to say some haven't, yet get unfairly targeted with little evidence they contribute to the spread.
 



I have heard, albeit second hand of folk when being asked for what premises they'd frequented giving false information to track and trace.

Also today we see folk being arrested for not supplying any information, trying to use the magna carta and common law in their defiance of the actual law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 

 


I have heard, albeit second hand of folk when being asked for what premises they'd frequented giving false information to track and trace. emoji852.png

Also today we see folk being arrested for not supplying any information, trying to use the magna carta and common law in their defiance of the actual law. emoji23.png

 

 

That's fantastic. :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It shows nothing, apart from some hearsay and unsubstantiated words. 
Nice effort. :byebye
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54950773

Also

Bryan Simpson, who represents hospitality workers at the trade union Unite, said: “It’s hugely important for the health and safety of our members who work in hospitality that track and trace works as its supposed to.
“However, the woeful inadequacy of Government support for self-isolating workers, particularly those in precarious employment, means that there is very little incentive to give the correct information.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Yflab said:

I reckon Baz will be called up to protect Queen and Country. Oaky will be his scientific advisor.
 

Surely they can’t be any worse than the cnuts that have gone before?

First thing I would do is fully pass power to the devolved governments to handle the pandemic including borrowing, second would be to make sure they ignore any of the new guys scientific advice. :whistle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-54950773

Also

Bryan Simpson, who represents hospitality workers at the trade union Unite, said: “It’s hugely important for the health and safety of our members who work in hospitality that track and trace works as its supposed to.
“However, the woeful inadequacy of Government support for self-isolating workers, particularly those in precarious employment, means that there is very little incentive to give the correct information.

 

Two arrests. :lol:

So, no proof there has been "inadequate information".................................away and get a bigger shovel. :byebye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

prepare for a hard(er) lockdown over Christmas.

 

Schools/nurseries to close on or around 04/12 and level 4 for the rest of us from 07/12

schools re-open on 07/01/2021

Intention is for the NHS to get some breathing space to deal with the winter surge, expected COVID 19 surge and to prepare for mass-vaccination early in the new year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...