The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[Chindie]

Indeed.

They've decided that the economic impact of a load of additional dead people is less than that of the impact of trying to mitigate those deaths.

[LondonLax]

13 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Indeed.

They've decided that the economic impact of a load of additional dead people is less than that of the impact of trying to mitigate those deaths.

Could it be that a severe economic impact could in itself result in many deaths?

I am having a very difficult time accepting your proposition that the medical officer would prioritise money over saving lives during a medical crisis. 

[bickster]

6 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I am having a very difficult time accepting your proposition that the medical officer would prioritise money over saving lives during a medical crisis

Do you find it that hard to believe that he's doing as he's told? It's not like this government doesn't have history for precisely this

[LondonLax]

Just now, bickster said:

Do you find it that hard to believe that he's doing as he's told? It's not like this government doesn't have history for precisely this

I would find that hard to believe yes. Nicola Sturgeon is following the same advice and making the same plans for Scotland, if she thought the medical officer was a puppet who’s strings were being pulled by Tory politicians she would be all over that like a rash (to excuse the pun).

For better of for worse (and my money’s on worse) the UK medical advisers have decided on this medical strategy which they believe will have the best chance of saving lives and the politicians from both sides of parliament are implementing it.

[bickster]

1 minute ago, LondonLax said:

I would find that hard to believe yes. Nicola Sturgeon is following the same advice and making the same plans for Scotland, if she thought the medical officer was a puppet who’s strings were being pulled by Tory politicians she would be all over that like a rash (to excuse the pun).

For better of for worse (and my money’s on worse) the UK medical advisers have decided on this medical strategy which they believe will have the best chance of saving lives and the politicians from both sides of parliament are implementing it.

No she's not. She announced on Thursday directly after the COBRA meeting that Scotland was banning all gatherings over 500, that was not a course of action that UK Govt was taking at that time, in fact it only reversed that, late Friday because the position was a) becoming untenable and b) was becoming a PR  nightmare for them. They didn't reverse that on any Medical / Behavioural advice that I've seen.

She announced that before Johnson spoke which in itself caused quite a shitstorm

[LondonLax]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

No she's not. She announced on Thursday directly after the COBRA meeting that Scotland was banning all gatherings over 500, that was not a course of action that UK Govt was taking at that time, in fact it only reversed that, late Friday because the position was a) becoming untenable and b) was becoming a PR  nightmare for them. They didn't reverse that on any Medical / Behavioural advice that I've seen.

She announced that before Johnson spoke which in itself caused quite a shitstorm

She also stated that she was doing it on a gut feeling and that it went against the best available scientific advice. If she thought the scientific advice the government were receiving at their COBRA meetings was not credible she would have blown that bombshell wide open for huge political gain.

Other than being a day apart on banning gatherings of 500 people Scotland is implementing the same measures as England. Is Sturgeon also prioritising money over saving people’s lives? 

 

 

[bickster]

1 minute ago, LondonLax said:

Is Sturgeon also prioritising money over saving people’s lives? 

 

Probably, the SNP aren't traditionally a left wing party despite the window dressing

[LondonLax]

Just now, bickster said:

Probably, the SNP aren't traditionally a left wing party despite the window dressing

C’mon man, these people are not evil monsters. We might disagree with their politics but they are acting on the medical advice provided to them to navigate the crisis. 

From the other thread it seems the next stage of the plan they are working to is to somehow isolate the most vulnerable members of society during the peak of the virus making its way through the younger and healthier members of the population. 

Like I said, I don’t necessarily buy into the plan (though we haven’t seen the information they have) but the motivation will undoubtably be to save lives.

[Stevo985]

On 14/03/2020 at 20:47, LondonLax said:

C’mon man, these people are not evil monsters. We might disagree with their politics but they are acting on the medical advice provided to them to navigate the crisis. 

From the other thread it seems the next stage of the plan they are working to is to somehow isolate the most vulnerable members of society during the peak of the virus making its way through the younger and healthier members of the population. 

Like I said, I don’t necessarily buy into the plan (though we haven’t seen the information they have) but the motivation will undoubtably be to save lives.

My question remains, why are we doing it differently to everyone else?

The government's advice and how they've explained it does make sense. It sounds good. But why aren't everyone else doing it this way?

We're either going to come out of this very well or very badly.

[LondonLax]

1 minute ago, Stevo985 said:

My question remains, why are we doing it differently to everyone else?

The government's advice and how they've explained it does make sense. It sounds good. But why aren't everyone else doing it this way?

We're either going to come out of this very well or very badly.

I think Sweden’s response looks similar to the UK, Australia is not much different at this stage either. The US seems to be trying all sorts of approaches on a state by state basis with no central strategy.

I was never advocating for one approach over another and am not in a position to explain anything, the only reason I got involved in this thread was to dispute the notion that Boris Johnson wants people to die.  

[desensitized43]

8 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I think Sweden’s response looks similar to the UK, Australia is not much different at this stage either. The US seems to be trying all sorts of approaches on a state by state basis with no central strategy.

I was never advocating for one approach over another and am not in a position to explain anything, the only reason I got involved in this thread was to dispute the notion that Boris Johnson wants people to die.  

He doesn't want people to die...he just doesn't care if they do.

[Davkaus]

6 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

He doesn't want people to die...he just doesn't care if they do.

If people care so much about losing loved ones, they should have prepared in advance and had **** loads like Boris did. 4D chess. 

[LondonLax]

13 minutes ago, desensitized43 said:

He doesn't want people to die...he just doesn't care if they do.

I don’t believe that either but there is no point going round in circles with another poster. You can see my previous responses for my thoughts.

Edited March 16, 2020 by LondonLax

[tonyh29]

17 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

I don’t believe that either but there is no point going round in circles with another poster. You can see my previous responses for my thoughts.

the very notion of what some people are writing suggests we need to be producing straight jackets as fast as we are producing hand wipes

 

[Stevo985]

Do I think Boris and the Tories want people to die? Definitely not

Do I think they don't care if those people die? No, I don't think that.

 

Do I think they're taking a riskier approach than other countries to protect the economy rather than a safer approach which would be more protective of human lives? Probably

[blandy]

5 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

the very notion of what some people are writing suggests we need to be producing straight jackets as fast as we are producing hand wipes

Well, yes...but....

You see if someone were to say that an individual has certain traits. I dunno, they might be a bit narcisistic, or maybe prone to telling untruths, or maybe they are selfish, or greedy, or maybe they brag about their prowess, or their wealth. Maybe they are egotistical. Maybe they are dishonest, maybe they are ambitious and so willing to tread on others to get their wish...

Now if you put that person in a position of power. You get a leader, let's call him, I dunno - Donald, say.

So there you have massively flawed Donald exhibiting all his weaknesses and biases and prejudices and ignorance and lack of humanity and callousness and racism as leader of a nation.

Right?

So if it can happen in America, why can it not happen, to an extent, here?

What if our PM or the top tories were, y'know, prone to and used to, taking steps and imlementing measures which favour one thing over another - for example their wealth, or their beliefs, or protecting their supporters wealth or status over other people's well-being? I mean could that happen?

Could we end up with a really bad situation as a consequence of deeply flawed people leading our country. A serial liar. Someone who won't even own up to having had all his children. People who implemented the bedroom tax and universal credit and cut social care and failed to do the right thing for the NHS. People who are responsible for the "hostile environment" as a deliberate policy. They absolutely know the implications and ramifications. And they don't care.

So while it seems "a bit off" to accuse the tories of deliberately causing death, or taking a callous approach, or genocide, it's nonetheless true that these people (at the top) are massively selfish, flawed, ambitious, arrogant, care not for the Law or scrutiny or criticism or compromise. They've "had enough of experts". They lied and lied over Brexit.

So, words removed, basically.

I can understand people being a bit rude about them.

 

[Mic09]

25 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Do I think Boris and the Tories want people to die? Definitely not

Do I think they don't care if those people die? No, I don't think that.

 

Do I think they're taking a riskier approach than other countries to protect the economy rather than a safer approach which would be more protective of human lives? Probably

Not that I agree with the government's tactic, but I wonder IF they were to protect the economy to a much wider extent than other nations, how that might that affect peoples lives in the future?

Say, 10 thousand people die compared to 5k that would have died if we sacrificed the economy.

How many people will be homeless? How many will go hungry? How badly will the NHS be hit? How many die as a consequence of the economic downturn?

It's a very risky bet from the tories, that's for sure. 

[Stevo985]

12 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

Not that I agree with the government's tactic, but I wonder IF they were to protect the economy to a much wider extent than other nations, how that might that affect peoples lives in the future?

Say, 10 thousand people die compared to 5k that would have died if we sacrificed the economy.

How many people will be homeless? How many will go hungry? How badly will the NHS be hit? How many die as a consequence of the economic downturn?

It's a very risky bet from the tories, that's for sure. 

Given their track record, I can't imagine they'd pass much benefit on from a loss of a hit to the economy to those people listed.

[snowychap]

 

[chrisp65]

8 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

the very notion of what some people are writing suggests we need to be producing straight jackets as fast as we are producing hand wipes

 

 

5 hours ago, blandy said:

Well, yes...but....

You see if someone were to say that an individual has certain traits. I dunno, they might be a bit narcisistic, or maybe prone to telling untruths, or maybe they are selfish, or greedy, or maybe they brag about their prowess, or their wealth. Maybe they are egotistical. Maybe they are dishonest, maybe they are ambitious and so willing to tread on others to get their wish...

Now if you put that person in a position of power. You get a leader, let's call him, I dunno - Donald, say.

So there you have massively flawed Donald exhibiting all his weaknesses and biases and prejudices and ignorance and lack of humanity and callousness and racism as leader of a nation.

Right?

So if it can happen in America, why can it not happen, to an extent, here?

What if our PM or the top tories were, y'know, prone to and used to, taking steps and imlementing measures which favour one thing over another - for example their wealth, or their beliefs, or protecting their supporters wealth or status over other people's well-being? I mean could that happen?

Could we end up with a really bad situation as a consequence of deeply flawed people leading our country. A serial liar. Someone who won't even own up to having had all his children. People who implemented the bedroom tax and universal credit and cut social care and failed to do the right thing for the NHS. People who are responsible for the "hostile environment" as a deliberate policy. They absolutely know the implications and ramifications. And they don't care.

So while it seems "a bit off" to accuse the tories of deliberately causing death, or taking a callous approach, or genocide, it's nonetheless true that these people (at the top) are massively selfish, flawed, ambitious, arrogant, care not for the Law or scrutiny or criticism or compromise. They've "had enough of experts". They lied and lied over Brexit.

So, words removed, basically.

I can understand people being a bit rude about them.

 

It’s less than a month since they were shamed in to getting rid of one of their new ‘blue sky thinkers’ due to his views on forced contraception, white supremacy and eugenics.