Just Seen the Covid 2nd Wave Projections

Erimus74 said:
parnabyscrosses, I respect your opinion & I have no issues with what your saying, I certainly wouldn't be asking why

That's his choice but regardless of liking football as a guard of honour people have got to accept that we don't all agree with such topics & this board is here for everyone opinions, as I rightly pointed out, if I said no one in their right mind woukd watch non support then people can have a go back, because I said it from my point of view then people should respect
My reference regarding Cummings was to point out that too much politics is being posted on here yet he sees fit to ask me why I continually post meaningful matches, which as I keep saying & will continue to say, they are meaningful, souless football, end of
Click to expand...
Have you been drinking Erimus?
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Quite possibly. Anyway, up to what age do you consider ‘young’ ? Up to what age do you think people should be able to crack on? Do you think they should be out there working if they are in their 20s but are obese, or have diabetes? Or have a mild autoimmune disease that doesn’t put them on the shielding list? It’s quite complicated.
Click to expand...
It isn't complicated at all. He didn't say he was forcing people to go back to work. From what I can gather he like myself wants people to be given the option to go back to work and to get on. If people want to stay at home and shield that's absolutely fine and support should be given to those people 100%. But people who want to go back to work, back to routine should not be vilified and called out for it when nobody knows everybody's individual circumstances.

Me, I'm 35 years old and my wife is 30. We have two young children under the age of 5 who are now starting to show the effects of this lockdown. I am a chef by trade sat at home on furlough as my business for no fault of my own has been forced to shut. I'm a realist, I know I cannot stay on furlough indefinitely and when the time comes that it ends I've still got to feed my kids and look after my family. How am I supposed to do this when our lives are been ran by a death rate for one illness out of hundreds that can also kill you? Our family are one of the lucky ones, my wife is still working and we are managing to pay bills just fine, even saving some money too. But it isn't a bottomless pit of money. What about those who are living hand to mouth every paycheck?
The WHO have said this virus isn't going away, who pays the wages of the NHS in 12-18 months time if people aren't paying taxes? Who feeds the mouths of the population when there is no money left? Who protects the population of this country should the absolute worst happen and the lights go out?
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Quite possibly. Anyway, up to what age do you consider ‘young’ ? Up to what age do you think people should be able to crack on? Do you think they should be out there working if they are in their 20s but are obese, or have diabetes? Or have a mild autoimmune disease that doesn’t put them on the shielding list? It’s quite complicated.
Click to expand...

If your obese get training anyone under 65 you are very unlikely to have anything other than mild symptoms and those numbers reduce drastically even further below the age of 50.
If you're on a shielding list (like one of my direct family members) then you should work from home and gauge risk .. if you can't work from home then admittedly it get more complicated and a furlough like system should be available.
However if you have asthma and are 28 and fit and healthy you aren't at any more risk than anyone else.

It's not simple but unless you believe that we can spend our yearly national defence budget every two months for a very long time creating a huge divide in society (because trust me there's one developing) then there isn't another solution.

Hope that answers your question, glad to hear your two friends are ok now.
 
RandySavage said:
It isn't complicated at all. He didn't say he was forcing people to go back to work. From what I can gather he like myself wants people to be given the option to go back to work and to get on. If people want to stay at home and shield that's absolutely fine and support should be given to those people 100%. But people who want to go back to work, back to routine should not be vilified and called out for it when nobody knows everybody's individual circumstances.

Me, I'm 35 years old and my wife is 30. We have two young children under the age of 5 who are now starting to show the effects of this lockdown. I am a chef by trade sat at home on furlough as my business for no fault of my own has been forced to shut. I'm a realist, I know I cannot stay on furlough indefinitely and when the time comes that it ends I've still got to feed my kids and look after my family. How am I supposed to do this when our lives are been ran by a death rate for one illness out of hundreds that can also kill you? Our family are one of the lucky ones, my wife is still working and we are managing to pay bills just fine, even saving some money too. But it isn't a bottomless pit of money. What about those who are living hand to mouth every paycheck?
The WHO have said this virus isn't going away, who pays the wages of the NHS in 12-18 months time if people aren't paying taxes? Who feeds the mouths of the population when there is no money left? Who protects the population of this country should the absolute worst happen and the lights go out?
Click to expand...

Whoah macho man, I’m not vilifying anybody.
Yourself and Alvez often make some good points that I agree with (although Alvez can be a bit abrasive in his delivery sometimes 😉)...
I just see this phrase being used more and more often these days ‘the young should be able to go back to work because there is little risk to them’ and I wonder what people consider to be young in this context, and if they really think the young should just head out and take their chances. There are plenty of young folk who live with their older parents still, as we all know, and so they may be in their late 20s and at lesser risk, but their older parents in their 60s could be at a much higher risk.
I’m not arguing one way or the other, by the way, I’m just saying it’s not as straightforward as the young will all be ok and have nothing to worry about, and the old can stay home. It actually is very complicated on lots of fronts. It’s dangerous to think you’ll be ok just because you are young. Over confidence can lead to a false sense of security and complacency.

I know you guys think the lockdown has been unnecessary but that’s open to debate and lifting it needs to be done carefully, because if we rush into things and the second wave comes sooner than expected, we are back to square one. May as well get the first lockdown exit ‘right’ (When the numbers and rates of transmission are definitely low enough) and then hopefully avoid a fast entry into a second wave.
God knows we got the timing of entering the first lockdown woefully wrong. Given that, (and the other catastrophes these Charlatans in government have presided over recently) I have very little faith that we will get the exit strategy right. Seems more and more clear to me that we are rushing into it just to change the newspaper headlines for purely political reasons.
 
Rushing out of lockdown to change a newspaper headlines is political suicide Fabio. Even Boris understands that.
 
Alvez_48 said:
No.. seriously?! Wow... I did not know that. /s

Apologies for my sarcasm, I should state that furlough is costing the public purse 15 billion a month (or half the UK's defence budget) so the only thing that is stopping mass collapse is the same thing that's going to cause mass collapse.
Click to expand...

Imagine we didn’t spend £100bn on Trident though, or £60bn on HS2. Or if we had a taxation system that was fair and targeted the mega wealthy and big corporations.
 
Block21 said:
Absolutely and believe it or not it is a football forum, so I don’t get what’s wrong with people wanting football back. The reason I come on here is Cos I love boro and I love football. I don’t come on here to talk about Dominic Cummings.
Click to expand...

Small point - it’s a Boro forum.
Huge difference to some (maybe many) saying it is a football forum.
 
RandySavage said:
Rushing out of lockdown to change a newspaper headlines is political suicide Fabio. Even Boris understands that.
Click to expand...

Also why the big rush to announce this good news on Thursday, when it’s not coming into force until Monday?
Was there something perhaps going on in the news that needed burying?
I mean, they were fine to announce that people should go back to work on Monday morning, at 7pm on Sunday evening! So why the rush to announce this easing if not for political reasons?

It’s so transparent it’s pathetic.
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Also why the big rush to announce this good news on Thursday, when it’s not coming into force until Monday?
Was there something perhaps going on in the news that needed burying?
I mean, they were fine to announce that people should go back to work on Monday morning, at 7pm on Sunday evening! So why the rush to announce this easing if not for political reasons?

It’s so transparent it’s pathetic.
Click to expand...

For those exact reasons you've already mentioned Fabio.

Best thing to do? People could use their own common sense instead of relying on a clueless government to hold their hands through life.
 
RandySavage said:
For those exact reasons you've already mentioned Fabio.

Best thing to do? People could use their own common sense instead of relying on a clueless government to hold their hands through life.
Click to expand...

I agree to a degree, but unfortunately large swathes of the population don’t have too much common sense, or rather having been deprived of family time, friend time, fun etc for months, it’s going to be very difficult for many to exercise the necessary restraint.

Meanwhile, a third government scientific advisor has come out and raised concerns about easing too early. He also says that the scientists have always been clear that the numbers need to be low AND the track and trace system needs to be fully operational and functional. Neither of those two provisos have been met.
Boris is risking many more lives just to protect his pal. It’s beyond comprehension to me.
 
‘Common sense’ IMO is a convenient term being misused/
We are looking for ‘average’ sense I reckon
 
WeeGord said:
Imagine we didn’t spend £100bn on Trident though, or £60bn on HS2. Or if we had a taxation system that was fair and targeted the mega wealthy and big corporations.
Click to expand...

So not to defend government but those are multi decade long projects that due to their costs are heavily scrutinized (HS2 in particular) and aren't paid for in a lump sum.
Are they value? To me no (The nukes might come in handy at the current rate of global destabilisation mind)
Are they a fair comparison? No.
 
NYboro said:
Obviously a few people in their 30s dying is acceptable to some.....
Click to expand...

I do find it kind of incredible that some people seem to think it's alright if you happen to be in that small percentage that die. That's alright then! Lets crack on and get back to work, it's only 38k have died so far and they were old(except the ones that weren't).
 
Chappy112 said:
I do find it kind of incredible that some people seem to think it's alright if you happen to be in that small percentage that die. That's alright then! Lets crack on and get back to work, it's only 38k have died so far and they were old(except the ones that weren't).
Click to expand...

No it's utterly terrible but sadly young people die all the time of a vast variety of ailments and accidents.
It's about proportionality, if 1 in every 1,000,000 35 year olds die of something you do not stop all activity for the other 35 year olds.
You just want to make it an emotional argument which is understandable as rationally it has no footing.
 
Chappy112 said:
I do find it kind of incredible that some people seem to think it's alright if you happen to be in that small percentage that die. That's alright then! Lets crack on and get back to work, it's only 38k have died so far and they were old(except the ones that weren't).
Click to expand...
You've missed the ones who have died from suicide, terminal illness, old age, accidents, pneumonia, heart attacks, strokes.

If and when the lockdown ends the government won't make it compulsory for you to leave the house. People will still be allowed to stay at home.
 
RandySavage said:
You've missed the ones who have died from suicide, terminal illness, old age, accidents, pneumonia, heart attacks, strokes.

If and when the lockdown ends the government won't make it compulsory for you to leave the house. People will still be allowed to stay at home.
Click to expand...

That's the problem for the lockdown folk on here. They're fine locking down if everyone else is but not ok with certain age groups (wonder why) or voluntarily locking down when the rest of us aren't. Bear even admitted it which was fair of him.
 
Chappy112 said:
I do find it kind of incredible that some people seem to think it's alright if you happen to be in that small percentage that die. That's alright then! Lets crack on and get back to work, it's only 38k have died so far and they were old(except the ones that weren't).
Click to expand...

You have hit the nail on the head.
Lets say we end up at 100000 deaths. On paper its horrendous
But, it touches only a tiny tiny % of the population and, for re election purposes will have an insignificant impact v trashing the savings and pensions of the countering Middle Class.

As they say - do the maths.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top