Jump to content

Generic Virus Thread


villakram

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Whether the next government is red, blue or green, they need to see the mistakes and be better equipped and more ready.

And on this, it's not just about the next government.

Part of the point of challenging Ministers and those in charge now about whether they were sufficiently prepared one month or two months ago ought to be to make sure that they know that they will be questioned in a month or two months about the decisions that they may not be giving proper attention to now in order to hope that they don't make similar errors over that decisions-making.

The real purpose of holding people to account ought not to be to pin blame for poor previos decision-making (though if there is a reckoning to be had, it should not be shied away from), it is to improve present and future decision-making.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Yes, that sounds similar to what Bicks and Tony have already said in the thread though I think the full details of the scheme are yet to be unveiled, aren't they? So, perhaps, it may get easier/tweaked to be more appropriate once it gets up and running.

On the second bit, there isn't a requirment of the scheme to pay people before the payments come in (hence why Martin took that position) and I've reead lots of talk about employers looking at coming to arrangements with their employees in order to see out that period (perhaps amending employment contracts, &c.). Yes, it's not the best course of action for the employees but if there's a chance that they can overlook delays then it's certainly worth considering for the long-term outlook.

In reference to the people my partner employs and manages specifically, these are hourly and low paid workers who can ill afford time not earning sadly.

Honestly I think the whole thing will become a joke, a very unfunny joke and a lot of people will be left destitute by the sheer incompetence of the government, but then, I have a very low opinion of the lot of them so perhaps I’m too biased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since WWII analogies seem to be en vogue these days, there were plenty of people who were annoyed by 'politicising' neville chamberlain's response as well, and that he was 'trying his best' too. 

My point is not that the situations are the same, or even similar, but that politics does not and cannot stop in a crisis. The response is led by politicians, choosing which advice to follow. To say they are 'doing their best' is to praise them for doing what literally everyone in their situation would be doing. The question is not whether they are *trying hard*, but whether they are *doing well*. And if you feel they aren't doing something right, the only way to change course is to apply political pressure. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I don’t think it will sorry.

You may well be right.

Quote

Theres an acceptable level of risk attached to a lot of things we do on a daily basis

I agree that risk plays a part in each and everyone's lives. Unfortunately, we as individuals and as groups are very poor at assessing risk properly and even worse at understanding it especially when the direst consequences may occur outside of our direct vision.

There is a vast amount of difference between taking risks where the person you put in danger is yourself and taking risks where the outcomes are most likely to fall on other people.

This is the essence of the problem with those people who are struggling to think this through properly and struggling to get it.

They are thinking about themselves and not much further.

Quote

People are finding it really difficult after one week of lockdown, just imagine people’s mental/emotional states in 7+ weeks of this, not to mention the (already evident) rise in domestic violence and abuse.

Yes, some people are finding it really difficult after one week. Those people will not find it any easier after two, three, six, nine or twelve weeks.

Quote

Its the right thing to do now, of course, it may even still be the right thing to do in 6+ weeks time but it will become more and more difficult to justify as people run out of hope and resources, and once genuine shortages of certain necessities become reality then that’s where I think people will snap.

Snapping will not help. People getting arsey will not pick the lettuces or the cucumbers in the fields or the asparagus or the soft fruits.

I agree that shortages will strain things further and, I also agree with the idea that people (maybe more people but certainly those people for whom personal excepptionalism is a driving mantra) will get to the point where they take issue with it.

I don't think that's likely to spread to a majority or even a significant majority if these measures are still seen as necessary and(relatively) pproportionate for dealing with thge spread of the virus and its resulting effects (illnesses, hospitalisations and deaths).

If some kick off then it's as likely to happen in two weeks time (far too many people have read in to the announcement the other day about the 'three weeks' instead of seeing it as being kept under review) as it is in five or eight - with one variable possiblly having more influence than anything else, that is the weather. If we go back to the other summer where disturbance spread across the country, there were lots of reports & studies talkiong about how the weather affects the likelihood of civil unrest. A heatwave in early May would not be a welcome thing for that reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

In reference to the people my partner employs and manages specifically, these are hourly and low paid workers who can ill afford time not earning sadly.

Oh, I agree and fully understand.

My post wasn't intended to be any criticism of people with businesses (or employees of those businesses) who would struggle to weather that kind of delay - just to say that I get that there will be situations where this could be a genuine issue even if the government scheme were otherwise to be something suitable (as opposed to those businesses that may well have enough cash reserves/access to temporary business loans and credit to cope and would just choose not to).

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Since WWII analogies seem to be en vogue these days.

Can I add to this that when this lockdown is lifted and pubs/clubs reopen then I think the country will put VE Day to shame.  It is going to be a massive party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, snowychap said:

You may well be right.

I agree that risk plays a part in each and everyone's lives. Unfortunately, we as individuals and as groups are very poor at assessing risk properly and even worse at understanding it especially when the direst consequences may occur outside of our direct vision.

There is a vast amount of difference between taking risks where the person you put in danger is yourself and taking risks where the outcomes are most likely to fall on other people.

This is the essence of the problem with those people who are struggling to think this through properly and struggling to get it.

They are thinking about themselves and not much further.

Yes, some people are finding it really difficult after one week. Those people will not find it any easier after two, three, six, nine or twelve weeks.

Snapping will not help. People getting arsey will not pick the lettuces or the cucumbers in the fields or the asparagus or the soft fruits.

I agree that shortages will strain things further and, I also agree with the idea that people (maybe more people but certainly those people for whom personal excepptionalism is a driving mantra) will get to the point where they take issue with it.

I don't think that's likely to spread to a majority or even a significant majority if these measures are still seen as necessary and(relatively) pproportionate for dealing with thge spread of the virus and its resulting effects (illnesses, hospitalisations and deaths).

If some kick off then it's as likely to happen in two weeks time (far too many people have read in to the announcement the other day about the 'three weeks' instead of seeing it as being kept under review) as it is in five or eight - with one variable possiblly having more influence than anything else, that is the weather. If we go back to the other summer where disturbance spread across the country, there were lots of reports & studies talkiong about how the weather affects the likelihood of civil unrest. A heatwave in early May would not be a welcome thing for that reason.

I wish I shared your optimism.

Right now I think we’re on the precipice of things turning into something more akin to ‘Escape from New York’ than a well maintained orderly society all playing along to the tune of the governments whims and wishes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I wish I shared your optimism.

It is something rarely leveled at me. :D

5 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

the governments whims

As soon as it looks like it is merely the whims of government that people are adhering to (rather than necessary measures to try and best help everyone) then your scenario becomes more likely, I'd agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, S-Platt said:

Can I add to this that when this lockdown is lifted and pubs/clubs reopen then I think the country will put VE Day to shame.  It is going to be a massive party.

They won't be no big parties authorised for at least 12 months I think. But I can see where your coming from. We will have to close off whole streets, everyone all together in a sign of unity and thanks it's all back to normality. Whatever that might be?

 

Shit me, just reminded me to stay off here, it's doing my anxiety no good at all, woke up positive this morning.

Edited by foreveryoung
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, S-Platt said:

Can I add to this that when this lockdown is lifted and pubs/clubs reopen then I think the country will put VE Day to shame.  It is going to be a massive party.

I suspect you're right, although I don't think it will look exactly the same (less focused on one day, maybe). I'm sure the demand for travel will be sky high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, markavfc40 said:


Perhaps. I guess anything is possible when you have Jeremy Hunt admitting failings none more so than the decimation of social care and the knock on effect that has had on the NHS.

It will mean f all though if we don't demand a different way of governing and what the priorities should be and that includes a willingness for those of us who can afford to pay a few quid more a week in taxes being happy to do so.

If any good can come from this I hope that it is we have a reset and that we value our public services and welfare safety net above all else and also value accordingly those now key during this crisis, and that includes those outside of the NHS, the carers, the check out staff, drivers etc etc.

Fully agree with that last paragraph. 

I really hope it does. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of idle curiosity, as we’re sort of debating the trade off between deaths and our standard of living, what numbers do people feel are the tipping point for all this being genuinely necessary.

So, for instance, some flu seasons we can have around 20,000 or 30,000 deaths, but we don’t shut down. So I’d presume nobody thinks we’d need a 3 month shut down if those were the predicted worse case / business as usual numbers. I think the ‘worst’ scenario we are seeing for the UK is circa 500,000 and clearly there are a small number willing to speak out and say that’s worth the hit.

So what if predicted worst case deaths due to business as normal were... 100,000? Higher? Lower? Where does the close down kick in for you?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The net is starting to close in around here. 
 

Mrs works for council in front line services. 2 co-managers have come down with it in the past week, one has had to call an ambulance (35 years old, no health issues) 
 

A member of her team also has a brother in intensive care at Heartlands, she’s messaged my wife to say they have had to put him in an induced coma. 
 

Fortunately, the Mrs hasn’t been in the office since last Monday and was only in for a short period of time. Eldest lad temping there too, told him to knock it on the head and I’ll cover his bills, it ain’t worth the risk. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

@HanoiVillan

Another update on the subject of that ICL model as we were discussing last night:

 

There's a good discussion of the underlying problems in this thread, IMO:

(These are simply the most relevant parts of a useful thread).

It's frustrating to have people claiming things that they don't fully understand, whether it's Tom Pike producing a purely statistical model that is overwhelmed by quite routine changes in the data, Jeremy Vine boosting his model without even slightly caveating it to his thousands of followers, or Peter Hitchens assuming that two completely different models produced by two different groups from two different departments of Imperial College are the same thing, because he hasn't researched it properly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â