Coronavirus

[Scott_M]

Just pulled this from the BBC...

 

”Businesses are legally required to take customers' contact details so they can be traced if there is an outbreak. They can be fined up to £10,000 if they take reservations of more than six, do not enforce social distancing, or do not take customers' contact details”.

 

Why can’t they force customers to do it via the app?

 

Which people wanting to go about their daily business in 2020 doesn’t have a smart phone?

[BeefStroganoff]

If i were in my 70s/80s I don't think Id want to cut off myself from my family and grandkids, i'd rather risk it.

 

We've already lost two people during these restrictions (not through covid) both of whom ended up being a bit cut off. Thankfully my mum got to see her sister during the lull in restrictions. Funeral was horrible though, utterly rank. Masks, hardly anyone was allowed in the church, just felt completely abnormal.

[Megadrive Man]

2 hours ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Yep. Too many intent on putting the whole country through this hell to give really old people an extra few months on this planet, but completely ignoring the detrimental effect it has on the quality of life and health of young people.

 

And then when this nonsense is done and dusted, it's young people who'll pick up the tab.

 

If you want to see what 'hell' looks like you should take a look in to what's going on in Yemen right now. Having a few temporary restrictions to try and combat a deadly virus isn't hell!

 

Its not just about the death toll either! Nobody knows enough about the long term effects of the virus yet. Many people that survived it are still suffering with the side effects. 

[Bjornebye]

Bloody nora. 

[Colt Seavers]

9 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Maybe I'm a traditionalist, but I was rather hoping you may give a reason why you disagree, given that I've supported my opinion.

You need an opinion why I think we shouldn't sacrifice one life for another based on age...you know what don't reply you are right if that's what you want but ive never been happier to be wrong

[Guest]

Nobody is listening to the government any more. They're just doing whatever. 

 

Spoke to someone today who works in aldi, apparently toilet rolls are flying off the shelves again. 

[Bjornebye]

Just now, Fluter in Dakota said:

Nobody is listening to the government any more. They're just doing whatever. 

 

Spoke to someone today who works in aldi, apparently toilet rolls are flying off the shelves again. 

If the toilet rolls aren't doing as their told then we're all fucked. 

[Strontium]

8 minutes ago, Colt Seavers said:

You need an opinion why I think we shouldn't sacrifice one life for another based on age...you know what don't reply you are right if that's what you want but ive never been happier to be wrong

 

Goid grief, how did you get that from what I wrote?

 

It seems you can't oppose these Tory restrictions without being accused of wanting some kind of grey genocide.

 

 

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Goid grief, how did you get that from what I wrote?

 

It seems you can't oppose these Tory restrictions without being accused of wanting some kind of grey genocide.

 

 

Fuck sake just own your own bullshit will you 

 

"Too many intent on putting the whole country through this hell to give really old people an extra few months on this planet, but completely ignoring the detrimental effect it has on the quality of life and health of young people".

[johnsusername]

4 minutes ago, Colonel Kurtz said:

Oh ok. I like a good wedding but it’s poor show not to provide a free bar for the guests particularly as numbers are limited. A free bar, a decent spread and fit bridesmaids and that’s me done for the night. Let us know how you get on. 

Fuck that! 

[Rico1304]

Professor Sir Ian Diamond, head of UK stats, on armchair statisticians: "This has become a nation of 58 million epidemiologists. And the great majority of them, unlike myself, have the benefit of hindsight"

[Colt Seavers]

3 hours ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Yep. Too many intent on putting the whole country through this hell to give really old people an extra few months on this planet, but completely ignoring the detrimental effect it has on the quality of life and health of young people.

 

And then when this nonsense is done and dusted, it's young people who'll pick up the tab.

 

3 hours ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

You know-nothing, dismal turd.

 

You're sacrificing the health and wellbeing of millions of young people to temporarily stave off the inevitable for a few thousand old people.

Have I misinterpreted what you said above some how.

@Bjornebye has called you out for lying many a time so I don't expect you to agree.

But just think on losing someone is heart wrenching no matter how old they are or if it's "their time" so don't belittle that.

On the topic of political parties I never mentioned anything about that so don't know the relevance of this.

[Rico1304]

My cousins son was getting married in October. The bridesmaids were all stunning, I couldn’t wait.  That was cancelled and the re-arranged date was when we are away in Feb (although we are going to the same country as them for honeymoon so that would have been ace). So, this next lockdown means the 2nd date will change and I’ll be able to perv at the bridesmaids.  

[Strontium]

9 minutes ago, Colt Seavers said:

Have I misinterpreted what you said above some how.

 

Yes. Because you're assuming that I think the measures we are taking actually work in the way they're supposed to.

 

I think the measures I support would lead to fewer deaths overall - in all cohorts.

[A Red]

Me and the now Mrs got married 2 weeks ago. Registery office with my 2 gay mates that run the chippie as witnesses. Put my suit on at 9.30 did the deed and was back home changed and off to a hotel with the wife and 2 dogs by 11am. Bladdered and home by 1pm the next day, whole thing cost about £350. Thats how you get married.

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Yes. Because you're assuming that I think the measures we are taking actually work in the way they're supposed to.

 

I think the measures I support would lead to fewer deaths overall - in all cohorts.

So this is an opinion backed up with no evidence? Which is fine of-course, I'd just like to clarify that. 

[Bjornebye]

Just now, A Red said:

Me and the now Mrs got married 2 weeks ago. Registery office with my 2 gay mates that run the chippie as witnesses. Put my suit on at 9.30 did the deed and was back home changed and off to a hotel with the wife and 2 dogs by 11am. Bladdered and home by 1pm the next day, whole thing cost about £350. Thats how you get married.

Fucking hell mate congratulations! 

 

commiserations to her too x 

[Colt Seavers]

1 minute ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

Yes. Because you're assuming that I think the measures we are taking actually work in the way they're supposed to.

 

I think the measures I support would lead to fewer deaths overall - in all cohorts.

Ok so to be clear what are the methods you support, I'm obviously confused and if I'm wrong I apologise 

[Strontium]

8 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

So this is an opinion backed up with no evidence? Which is fine of-course, I'd just like to clarify that. 

 

I've posted several things in the past few days about how lockdowns, social distancing etc may lead to more deaths.

 

The long a pandemic goes on, the bigger the chance there is of someone vulnerable contracting the virus. So your number one priority should be ending the pandemic as soon as is humanly possible, thereby shortening the time in which the genuinely at-risk can be exposed to the virus.

 

I have argued that the best way of doing this, in the absence of a vaccine (which may never come), is to allow the virus to move through the majority of the population who are at a very low risk of dying from the disease while aggressively shielding the vulnerable.

 

You're free to disagree, but to claim my opinion hasn't been supported is gibberish.

 

7 minutes ago, Colt Seavers said:

Ok so to be clear what are the methods you support, I'm obviously confused and if I'm wrong I apologise 

 

No need to apologise. See above.

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

I've posted several things in the past few days about how lockdowns, social distancing etc may lead to more deaths.

 

The long a pandemic goes on, the bigger the chance there is of someone vulnerable contracting the virus. So your number one priority should be ending the pandemic as soon as is humanly possible, thereby shortening the time in which the genuinely at-risk can be exposed to the virus.

 

I have argued that the best way of doing this is to allow the virus to move through the majority of the population who are at a very low risk of dying from the disease while aggressively shielding the vulnerable.

 

You're free to disagree, but to claim my opinion hasn't been supported is gibberish.

 

 

Thats fair enough if thats your option Strontz, I've not problem with that but why not just say it like that instead of being a jumped up gobshite abut it then? 

 

You've been a contrary arse since the start of this thread tbh. 

 

Just put a fucking mask on and get on with it. 

[Mook]

53 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

If the toilet rolls aren't doing as their told then we're all fucked. 

Superb, had a wee chuckle at that.

[Colt Seavers]

4 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

I've posted several things in the past few days about how lockdowns, social distancing etc may lead to more deaths.

 

The long a pandemic goes on, the bigger the chance there is of someone vulnerable contracting the virus. So your number one priority should be ending the pandemic as soon as is humanly possible, thereby shortening the time in which the genuinely at-risk can be exposed to the virus.

 

I have argued that the best way of doing this, in the absence of a vaccine (which may never come), is to allow the virus to move through the majority of the population who are at a very low risk of dying from the disease while aggressively shielding the vulnerable.

 

You're free to disagree, but to claim my opinion hasn't been supported is gibberish.

 

 

No need to apologise. See above.

I never claimed your opinion wasn't supported did I?

I just disagreed with you "saying" we need to sacrifice the old for the good of the young which you must admit you said.

You're opinion above is fair enough but why not just say it like that without trying to spark a reaction.

Maybe we just leave it here now, no point flooding the forum anymore...thanks for your clarification 

[TheHowieLama]

14 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

 

The long a pandemic goes on, the bigger the chance there is of someone vulnerable contracting the virus.

This doesn't quite jibe with your cutting edge "low hanging fruit" concept. In that case the longer it is around, the less chance vulnerable people have of contracting it cuz, well, they are dead.

 

After the "returning home from the family villa in Spain" I now read everything you post in the voice of Thurston Howell III so at least the day isn't a total loss.

[Bjornebye]

 

 

 

 

[Dave D]

I never realised my local was still open after 10pm. On the rare occasion Im gracing them with my presence the Singapore chowmein cravings from the chinese next door kick in about 845pm followed by the wobbly walk home.