Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Coronavirus


Bjornebye

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Чемпионы said:

While I get your point, I don't think it would have mattered, selfish thoughtless pricks would have found anther reason. to be selfish thoughtless pricks. The media hyped the whole mess up too, which doesn't help anyway 


Maybe, but when there is no trust in the government at what is one of the most critical times we’ll face as a species/country there is only one real place to apportion blame, other variables would follow, but it’s cart before the horse when saying the blame doesn’t start and end with the government and their tragic mishandling of everything.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bruce Spanner said:


Maybe, but when there is no trust in the government at what is one of the most critical times we’ll face as a species/country there is only one real place to apportion blame, other variables would follow, but it’s cart before the horse when saying the blame doesn’t start and end with the government and their tragic mishandling of everything.

We needed a statesman in this crisis, just as the USA needed one too. Both of us failed there and have annoying tv personalities that haven't got the charisma to carry the office nor the backbone to make the tough decisions. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

If you think this is fascism then you need to read a few more books about the Nazis. I don’t think they were big on the state paying healthy people to stay at home in order to protect the weaker members of society. You probably couldn’t be more wrong with that choice of analogy. 

 

I couldn't be more right. Barring people from coming into the country. Barring people from leaving the country. Putting people under house arrest. Preventing families from mixing. Curfews. Getting people to snitch on each other. Banning all sporting events. Banning live music. The list goes on.

 

I agree that Boris Johnson doesn't have a toothbrush moustache though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m starting to feel quite down about it again now, there just doesn’t seem to be an end in sight. 
 

Witty was saying today small numbers of vaccines for the most vulnerable before the end of 2020 and the rest in Q2’21.

 

We’re all going to have lost at least a year of our lives before things are normal-ish again - when we get to the pearly / firey gates nobody is going to say go back and have another year.

 

But at least I still have my life and health, so I shouldn’t take that for granted. Death tolls like Q2’20 would be horrific again - it might be my parents or grand parents next. 

 

There is no correct answer. I saw the average age of a COVID19 death is 80. Could extra shielding be given to the vulnerable and elderly and let everybody else get on with it, making sure all distancing, masks & app use is mandatory? 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

My understanding from my secret source is that they have spent the whole weekend debating what to do. There is a camp led by the Chancellor saying lockdowns for the general population are ultimately pointless in the longer term (the virus just comes back when the lockdown ends) and ruinously expensive (£200 billion so far) with no obvious benefit if all we did was delay the spread of the virus until the winter months when it will spread more easily.

 

The longer you can delay getting the virus though the more time you buy to develop treatments and trial vaccines etc.

 

Part of the reason covid deaths have gone down is because the hospitals have a better understanding of the virus now. This is exactly why we should have gone in to lockdown much earlier than we did and worked out a sensible longer term plan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

I couldn't be more right. Barring people from coming into the country. Barring people from leaving the country. Putting people under house arrest. Preventing families from mixing. Curfews. Getting people to snitch on each other. Banning all sporting events. Banning live music. The list goes on.

 

I agree that Boris Johnson doesn't have a toothbrush moustache though.

Oh, it is without doubt despotic, authoritarian rule. Its certainly as close to fascism as any other governing rule in UK history. What other epoch comes close? Even during the World Wars it didn't approach this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

I don't feel like indulging the population density myth any more. Some selected population densities: Stockholm 4800 per sq km. London 5700 per sq km, Manchester 4700 per sq km, Birmingham 4200 per sq km. Malmo 4000 per sq km.

 

They've had 5,865 deaths on a population of 10,343,403. I make that 567 deaths per million.

 

So they obviously have a lower percentage of deaths than us, but the argument wasn't that they were more effective. It was that they've managed the situation without imposing fascism on their citizens.

Those UK figures appear to be for the regions or urban areas as a whole, not the city. Going well outside of the M25 there for London there (Guildford was included at one point). Most of the inner city boroughs are double that of Stockholm and together have 3/4 times the population.

 

It's a limited measure (as it's really about how different localities mix, healthcare provision and communication), but it's far from a myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Чемпионы said:

"Even during the world wars it didn't come close to this"

 

I don't know where to start, you're as mad as the nazi hunter.

Let's make this simple for you: did the government operate complete social lockdown during World War 2?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex_K said:

Let's make this simple for you: did the government operate complete social lockdown during World War 2?

 

How is it even relevant????? One is a contagious virus the other is bombs dropping randomly from the sky. Fucking hell man 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Pidge said:

It's not even totalitarian, even despite the home secretary's quite blatant steps in that direction by encouraging people to report on their neighbours.

Work from home and police yourselves. Utopia.

 

It is a fair point to say that the personal liberties, globally - due to a shared response - have been affected. Probably unlike any event before. Because the globe is now passing information - good and bad - at a rate never imagined in past years of plague.

 

Link to comment
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.


×
×
  • Create New...