Our world beating variant

FatCat said:
I may. It be up to date on the rules but I thought people were told to work from home where possible. Surely in the example you give the employer is at fault?
Click to expand...

Yes, the employer is at fault, but fundamentally the Government is at fault because they are enabling this. It was said right back at the start of restrictions that this would happen and there is no way for employees to refuse to go into work. There are no protections in place.
 
SmallTown said:
We’re they clear at the beginning? Did they change often? Did we get lockdowns then tiers systems then lockdowns that were called tier systems.

I recall one presser where the prime minister himself said things like “you MUST stay at home unless you have to go to work, in which case you MUST NOT use public transport, unless you have to.” So that’s clear then. Personally I think the rules are pretty clear at the moment, apart from the vaguery of what constitutes a local area. That’s missing the point. The weren’t clear at first and THEY WERE BROKEN BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND THIS WAS DEFENDED BY THE ENTIRE CABINET.

I know you’re trying to ignore that bit but it’s a fact. Maybe THAT has led to the general public not exactly taking things seriously. You are happy to play the propaganda game and happy to do the governments blame the people bidding. However, you seem to have missed the causality
Click to expand...
SmallTown said:
We’re they clear at the beginning? Did they change often? Did we get lockdowns then tiers systems then lockdowns that were called tier systems.

I recall one presser where the prime minister himself said things like “you MUST stay at home unless you have to go to work, in which case you MUST NOT use public transport, unless you have to.” So that’s clear then. Personally I think the rules are pretty clear at the moment, apart from the vaguery of what constitutes a local area. That’s missing the point. The weren’t clear at first and THEY WERE BROKEN BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND THIS WAS DEFENDED BY THE ENTIRE CABINET.

I know you’re trying to ignore that bit but it’s a fact. Maybe THAT has led to the general public not exactly taking things seriously. You are happy to play the propaganda game and happy to do the governments blame the people bidding. However, you seem to have missed the causality
Click to expand...
Small town - I am responding to an op who is blaming the spread of a single variant solely on the PM. There are many complexities to this story - your media story may carry some weight and yes the gvt have handled this badly but my point remains taht people are fundamentally part of the problem, to exonerate and excuse bad behaviours on their part is the part I don’t agree with.
 
FatCat said:
I don’t really buy into the gvt blaming people - they would have very rich pickings and out a lot more focus on rule breakers than they do. I think they have been far too lenient for too long so I do take free that this is their strategy to blame the public. I blame the public as I see what’s going on around me , in my street when I’m out for a run.
Click to expand...

What have you seen? Specific examples if you may?
 
MolteniArcore said:
What have you seen? Specific examples if you may?
Click to expand...
So
MolteniArcore said:
What have you seen? Specific examples if you may?
Click to expand...
last weekend my neighbour opposite had a party broken up by the police - small town will tell you the rules are confusing I will tell you my neighbour was acting like a child!!!

my other neighbour constantly has family members and friends in and out of her house daily. She then goes to her daughter in laws to look after her child so the daughter in law who is a hairdresser can goto cut people’s hair (again no confusion it’s just simply not allowed)

I could go on and on!
 
FatCat said:
So

last weekend my neighbour opposite had a party broken up by the police - small town will tell you the rules are confusing I will tell you my neighbour was acting like a child!!!

my other neighbour constantly has family members and friends in and out of her house daily. She then goes to her daughter in laws to look after her child so the daughter in law who is a hairdresser can goto cut people’s hair (again no confusion it’s just simply not allowed)

I could go on and on!
Click to expand...
Are your curtains worn out yet ?
 
FatCat said:
So

last weekend my neighbour opposite had a party broken up by the police - small town will tell you the rules are confusing I will tell you my neighbour was acting like a child!!!

my other neighbour constantly has family members and friends in and out of her house daily. She then goes to her daughter in laws to look after her child so the daughter in law who is a hairdresser can goto cut people’s hair (again no confusion it’s just simply not allowed)

I could go on and on!
Click to expand...

Sounds bad!!! I can assure you the good people of Hambleton are sticking to the rules to offset the bad behaviour round your way... 😬
 
FatCat said:
Ahhh the old vague rules, I’m confused defence! There have been times when the rules have been clear enough for a three year old to understand. Yet people were still doing what they do.


Speaking of the media of anything they have been the ones stirring trouble “ is a scotch egg a substantial meal” do you remember all that? That wasnt the gvts doing!!
Click to expand...
The rules are vague. One live example is my wife is allowed to form a support bubble with 1 household as she is on maternity and has a child under 1. At least this is what the health visitor advised

I was under the impression that as she’s off work she wasn’t allowed
 
GazC_MFC said:
The rules are vague. One live example is my wife is allowed to form a support bubble with 1 household as she is on maternity and has a child under 1. At least this is what the health visitor advised

I was under the impression that as she’s off work she wasn’t allowed
Click to expand...

People who don't believe the rules are vague must have very simple lives. When you factor in going to work, support bubbles, providing care, providing childcare, shopping, meet one other person for exercise etc someone in lockdown can see many many people a week.

One you can argue about all day is 'staying local' for things like exercise. Define local... you can't. 1 mile? 2 miles? What if your nearest shop is 5 miles away? etc etc
 
Last edited:
MolteniArcore said:
People who don't believe the rules are vague must have very simple lives. When you factor in going to work, support bubbles, providing care, providing childcare, shopping, meet one other person for exercise etc someone in lockdown can see many many people a week.

One you can argue about all day is 'staying local' for things like exercise. Define local... you can't. 1 mile? 2 miles? What if your nearest shop is 5 miles away? etc etc
Click to expand...
There are difficulties around the edges for some rules I see that.

my example - having a party - that is just out and out selfish. No one organising or attending can blame vague rules for that sort of behaviour - it’s just plain wrong.

there is also common sense to factor in - just because you can do something doesn’t mean you have to - the debacle which was eat out to help out. I looked at that and thought no chance that’s just plain ridiculous. I could do it but I chose not to.

Id like to think we are not all sheep being manipulated by the media , gvt or whoever else - and can make our own assessments and decisions accordingly.
 
FatCat said:
Id like to think we are not all sheep being manipulated by the media , gvt or whoever else - and can make our own assessments and decisions accordingly.
Click to expand...
It’s the reasons we have laws and inadvertently we are sheep because we follow them. Laws manipulate and curb human instinct, which is survival of the fittest
 
FatCat said:
There are difficulties around the edges for some rules I see that.

my example - having a party - that is just out and out selfish. No one organising or attending can blame vague rules for that sort of behaviour - it’s just plain wrong.

there is also common sense to factor in - just because you can do something doesn’t mean you have to - the debacle which was eat out to help out. I looked at that and thought no chance that’s just plain ridiculous. I could do it but I chose not to.

Id like to think we are not all sheep being manipulated by the media , gvt or whoever else - and can make our own assessments and decisions accordingly.
Click to expand...

After the first lockdown, round about the time Rishi introduced Eat Out To Help Out the narrative from the Government and media changed. It has gone from the pandemic being a Governmenttal responsibility to it being well and truly on the people.

It doesn't matter now that Johnson and Co have made the same errors with all 3 lockdowns, have failed to communicate effectively to the public and this has ended up with us in a lockdown with no end date and Government ministers coming out daily and telling us conflicting messages. We have been closing the borders down for 5 weeks, why the delay?

Anyway, my point is, they are getting a free pass now. And in my humble opinion if you are now blaming the public when the Government continue to make the same mistakes that have cost over 100,000 lives you are a sheep and have been manipulated. It's just taken you 6 months to comply with the Government's wishes.

They are imbiclles. Look today, announcing that they are undoing the NHS reforms THEY VOTED FOR and bringing in new reforms. Why? probably to blame the NHS for the poor pandemic response at some point down the line. It's all so obvious what they are doing. It's just like a new Brexit campaign, but this time they can't blame the foreigners, so they blame the next lowest, the public.
 
MolteniArcore said:
After the first lockdown, round about the time Rishi introduced Eat Out To Help Out the narrative from the Government and media changed. It has gone from the pandemic being a Governmenttal responsibility to it being well and truly on the people.

It doesn't matter now that Johnson and Co have made the same errors with all 3 lockdowns, have failed to communicate effectively to the public and this has ended up with us in a lockdown with no end date and Government ministers coming out daily and telling us conflicting messages. We have been closing the borders down for 5 weeks, why the delay?

Anyway, my point is, they are getting a free pass now. And in my humble opinion if you are now blaming the public when the Government continue to make the same mistakes that have cost over 100,000 lives you are a sheep and have been manipulated. It's just taken you 6 months to comply with the Government's wishes.

They are imbiclles. Look today, announcing that they are undoing the NHS reforms THEY VOTED FOR and bringing in new reforms. Why? probably to blame the NHS for the poor pandemic response at some point down the line. It's all so obvious what they are doing. It's just like a new Brexit campaign, but this time they can't blame the foreigners, so they blame the next lowest, the public.
Click to expand...
Without this government are you seriously telling me that the public would have observed the rules?
 
FatCat said:
Without this government are you seriously telling me that the public would have observed the rules?
Click to expand...

No, but if the Government had not spent the last year blaming the public, changing the rules like they change their pants and waiting until it was too late to lockdown meaning we would have to lockdown longer and harder the public might have reacted a little better.

But what you forget is that the MASSIVE majority of the public are following the rules. In all the Government's models people not following the rules is factored in. In the first wave (if memory serves me correctly) they factored in a compliance level of 70 odd percent, turns out it was 93% compliance. And as such if cases are going up it means that the rules and models were wrong, not that the public caused it.

How crazy would it be to think 100% of people would follow rules so you design a lockdown for 100% compliance then moan it's not working when only 90% comply? You design the rules for 80% compliance and then are delighted when you have 90% compliance and the lockdown ends quicker. And this in itself is why is CAN'T be the public's fault.
 
MolteniArcore said:
No, but if the Government had not spent the last year blaming the public, changing the rules like they change their pants and waiting until it was too late to lockdown meaning we would have to lockdown longer and harder the public might have reacted a little better.

But what you forget is that the MASSIVE majority of the public are following the rules. In all the Government's models people not following the rules is factored in. In the first wave (if memory serves me correctly) they factored in a compliance level of 70 odd percent, turns out it was 93% compliance. And as such if cases are going up it means that the rules and models were wrong, not that the public caused it.

How crazy would it be to think 100% of people would follow rules so you design a lockdown for 100% compliance then moan it's not working when only 90% comply? You design the rules for 80% compliance and then are delighted when you have 90% compliance and the lockdown ends quicker. And this in itself is why is CAN'T be the public's fault.
Click to expand...
I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
FatCat said:
I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...
It seems that way.

Just remember the Gov know people will break the rules and allow for it. There isn't really a need to blame them. The problem isn't big enough to warrant it. But it's really handy to cover up failures and corruption at the highest levels...

Anyway, have a good evening (y)
 
He could have worded it better if you let it rip through the non vulnerable people the virus has more chance of mutating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top