Jump to content

Generic Virus Thread


villakram

Recommended Posts

🤦‍♂️ 

Quote

Grandparents and others who provide informal childcare will be exempt from coronavirus rules in local lockdown areas in England, Health Secretary Matt Hancock has announced.

Speaking in the House of Commons on Monday, Mr Hancock acknowledged the "concerns" about the impact of local lockdowns on families' childcare arrangements.

Skynews

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Nothing must interfere with working. Nothing!

I bet the scientists are delighted. Fresh out of the big speech about things have to change, we need to make tough decisions, break the inter household meetings Hancock says this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Genie said:

I did address it

:lol:

No, you didn't.

7 hours ago, Genie said:

Its not about revoking someone’s right to protest during a pandemic that struck a chord, or saying they should not be allowed to protest because one does not agree with the cause.
It’s protesting about not wanting to wear a mask by yelling in the face of the police officers without any kind of face covering.

This is just remarkable stuff. It's quite clear that you either failed to understand both what I was saying and what you, yourself, were saying (and ignoring) in your responses.

As such, I'll leave it there - because this exchange was pointless from the moment that you've tried to make out that you were genuinely understanding the positions each of us was taking.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, desensitized43 said:

Fixed.

They have the right to protest in a peaceful way. A large proportion of these idiots are of the ultra-right wing skinheaded variety. They don't do peaceful protest.

If you don't want to wear a mask, it's not a legal requirement (hopefully the government will grow a pair and change this), but it is irresponsible and selfish given what we know. It's not to protect you, it's to protect others from what's coming out of you. The fact it's not a legal requirement shows how utterly ridiculous these people are, protesting something that's currently advisory.

No, not 'fixed' at all.

Indeed most of your post goes to further support the point that I was originally making. Thank you.

Edited by snowychap
Changed 'all' to 'most'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, snowychap said:

This is just remarkable stuff. It's quite clear that you either failed to understand both what I was saying and what you, yourself, were saying (and ignoring) in your responses.

 

31 minutes ago, snowychap said:

No, not 'fixed' at all.

Indeed most of your post goes to further support the point that I was originally making. Thank you.

Comes back after 10 hours to say you’re going to leave it here but reiterate we’re both wrong :lol: 

Maybe as I said before, you’re not being clear in the point you think you’re making if it’s not what it’s being interpreted as. Repeating the message we’ve failed to understand your point is the sign 👍

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Genie said:

The papers are suggesting he’s struggling to make ends meet on a mere £150k per year having given up his lucrative newspaper column.

To be fair £150k pa for the job is a pittance. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chrisp65 said:

Is there a salary point at which it would attract people that were competent and honest?

I put it in the other thread, for running the country I don’t think £1m would be obscene (given the salary’s of other senior executives). It might then attract a better calibre of applicant. Then if the make less **** ups it’ll pay for itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The money will come in when he steps down from politics. After dinner speaking, books, newspaper columns, etc

I think £1m a year would be about right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

I put it in the other thread, for running the country I don’t think £1m would be obscene (given the salary’s of other senior executives). It might then attract a better calibre of applicant. Then if the make less **** ups it’ll pay for itself.

Angela Merkel earns £200,000

I would say she’s fairly good at her job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Is there a salary point at which it would attract people that were competent and honest?

Maybe it's the public facing aspect and the constant stress that keeps people away that have the relevant skills in abundance for this type of job ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Angela Merkel earns £200,000

I would say she’s fairly good at her job.

I’m sure there’s lots of good people in business at £150k or less too. 
Even at £15k Boris is bad value for money 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

I’m sure there’s lots of good people in business at £150k or less too. 
Even at £15k Boris is bad value for money 

Which is why it won’t be fixed by offering a million pound prize.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Maybe it's the public facing aspect and the constant stress that keeps people away that have the relevant skills in abundance for this type of job ?

But you have stress and public facing aspects in other countries, such as Germany, or New Zealand or wherever. They appear to have, at the very least, respectable competent leaders.

I agree there is massive stress. Perhaps the job should be given to someone that can deal with stress. A nurse, maybe. My point being, I really don’t think doubling or quadrupling the pay would buy us better politicians.

My MP was on 220K, he’s awful. For 500k, he’d still be awful.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â