COVID19

[morepork]

I quite agree that the messaging is awful, or at best confusing. But when you read comments like ‘covid isn’t that dangerous’ and ‘rules are there to be broken’ you realise that even if the messaging had been good, there are still gigantic twats out there who are too selfish for everyone’s good.

And without a national lockdown with common controls, the current situation is too difficult to police which makes the regulations effectively unenforceable.

If your messaging is clear and consistent (and consistently applied) it leaves purveyors of bullshit like the Sun with less freedom to undermine it. It also makes the police's job easier.

Whilst I agree that the government has made a total hash of this, groups of people partying in public and private aren’t helping to contain the disease. The rule of six has been in place across England for a while yet there is plenty of evidence for that being ignored. There has to be some personal responsibility in all of this.

What, like those politicians that broke the rules and still have their jobs you mean?

[Son of Mathonwy]

I quite agree that the messaging is awful, or at best confusing. But when you read comments like ‘covid isn’t that dangerous’ and ‘rules are there to be broken’ you realise that even if the messaging had been good, there are still gigantic twats out there who are too selfish for everyone’s good.

And without a national lockdown with common controls, the current situation is too difficult to police which makes the regulations effectively unenforceable.

If your messaging is clear and consistent (and consistently applied) it leaves purveyors of bullshit like the Sun with less freedom to undermine it. It also makes the police's job easier.

Whilst I agree that the government has made a total hash of this, groups of people partying in public and private aren’t helping to contain the disease. The rule of six has been in place across England for a while yet there is plenty of evidence for that being ignored. There has to be some personal responsibility in all of this.

Agreed, these idiots are making it worse.

[Puja]

I quite agree that the messaging is awful, or at best confusing. But when you read comments like ‘covid isn’t that dangerous’ and ‘rules are there to be broken’ you realise that even if the messaging had been good, there are still gigantic twats out there who are too selfish for everyone’s good.

And without a national lockdown with common controls, the current situation is too difficult to police which makes the regulations effectively unenforceable.

If your messaging is clear and consistent (and consistently applied) it leaves purveyors of bullshit like the Sun with less freedom to undermine it. It also makes the police's job easier.

Whilst I agree that the government has made a total hash of this, groups of people partying in public and private aren’t helping to contain the disease. The rule of six has been in place across England for a while yet there is plenty of evidence for that being ignored. There has to be some personal responsibility in all of this.

While there is always a risk of dickheads, the mishmash of government response has fuelled them. If you look at the first lockdown, the rules were generally pretty well stuck to because the government made a play for it being a matter of patriotism and national pride - we were "Protecting the NHS" and channelling the Blitz spirit and breaking the rules wasn't enforced by police punishment as much as they were by social shaming and peer pressure. People felt it was important, but also that we were genuinely all in it together. Then we changed tack and started prioritising other things - first Dominic Cummings's political career, then saving the entertainment industry and Eat Out To Help Out, then it was town centres and making sure Pret a Manger didn't go out of business and getting back to the office, then going to pubs was all fine and in fact encouraged, then Stanley Johnson not having a mask and that not being a problem.

The government have gone from what was actually a pretty solid start to skipping from policy to policy, all of them giving the impression that things are going back to normal and we beat it. Is it any wonder that they're having a tough time convincing idiots to take it seriously again when they've had the summer of implying that COVID is less important than eating in restaurants, going to the pub, and buying sandwiches from Pret?

I think they stand an outside chance of getting the national response back again by emphasising that this lockdown is "to save Christmas" (although I'd imagine there's a few Muslims a bit fucked off given that Eid Al-Mubarak was apparently unimportant enough to be cancelled with just a few hours' notice), but they're going to need a good 75% of people buying in before it's become a matter of obloquy to be caught breaking it.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

If your messaging is clear and consistent (and consistently applied) it leaves purveyors of bullshit like the Sun with less freedom to undermine it. It also makes the police's job easier.

Whilst I agree that the government has made a total hash of this, groups of people partying in public and private aren’t helping to contain the disease. The rule of six has been in place across England for a while yet there is plenty of evidence for that being ignored. There has to be some personal responsibility in all of this.

While there is always a risk of dickheads, the mishmash of government response has fuelled them. If you look at the first lockdown, the rules were generally pretty well stuck to because the government made a play for it being a matter of patriotism and national pride - we were "Protecting the NHS" and channelling the Blitz spirit and breaking the rules wasn't enforced by police punishment as much as they were by social shaming and peer pressure. People felt it was important, but also that we were genuinely all in it together. Then we changed tack and started prioritising other things - first Dominic Cummings's political career, then saving the entertainment industry and Eat Out To Help Out, then it was town centres and making sure Pret a Manger didn't go out of business and getting back to the office, then going to pubs was all fine and in fact encouraged, then Stanley Johnson not having a mask and that not being a problem.

The government have gone from what was actually a pretty solid start to skipping from policy to policy, all of them giving the impression that things are going back to normal and we beat it. Is it any wonder that they're having a tough time convincing idiots to take it seriously again when they've had the summer of implying that COVID is less important than eating in restaurants, going to the pub, and buying sandwiches from Pret?

I think they stand an outside chance of getting the national response back again by emphasising that this lockdown is "to save Christmas" (although I'd imagine there's a few Muslims a bit fucked off given that Eid Al-Mubarak was apparently unimportant enough to be cancelled with just a few hours' notice), but they're going to need a good 75% of people buying in before it's become a matter of obloquy to be caught breaking it.

Puja

I acknowledge all of that and agree. But since when do we have to have common sense dictated to us by a government? People do need to take some responsibility for their own actions and even in the tiered system, guidance was available. It is often ignored. I believe Cummins should have been sacked, but he wasn’t. Using him as an excuse to ignore restrictions designed to safeguard public health isn’t that bright. Yet many do.

I agree the government is performing very badly. Yet the advice that has been provided was designed to balance the risk of the virus versus the impact to the economy. But it relied people behaving sensibly. Sadly too many cannot.

[Sandydragon]

And more good news, Farage is plotting a return to front line politics. His new party, Reform UK, will campaign against lockdowns and other restrictions on liberties and will be fielding candidates at any forthcoming elections.

Just what we all wanted I know.

[Which Tyler]

And more good news, Farage is plotting a return to front line politics. His new party, Reform UK, will campaign against lockdowns and other restrictions on liberties and will be fielding candidates at any forthcoming elections.

Just what we all wanted I know.

If he'd found some honesty, he'd call it the libertarian party.

But no - he's after people (uninformed idiots in this case) who want electoral form in terms of fairer representation.

[Sandydragon]

And more good news, Farage is plotting a return to front line politics. His new party, Reform UK, will campaign against lockdowns and other restrictions on liberties and will be fielding candidates at any forthcoming elections.

Just what we all wanted I know.

If he'd found some honesty, he'd call it the libertarian party.

But no - he's after people (uninformed idiots in this case) who want electoral form in terms of fairer representation.

Great set of images - that is essentially the argument made by many who oppose the lockdown. People are going to die so let them get on with it. I absolutely get the argument that managing covid means other medical issues are often de-prioritised, although I think the NHS has got a lot better now at managing covid alongside other emergencies provided that they don't get overwhelmed.

I'd be quite happy if those who think the lockdown is a waste of time signed a piece of paper refusing all NHS aid if they catch covid so they can get on with their lives.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Farage wants us to ignore Covid and get on with our lives ... or deaths as the case may be.

[Sandydragon]

Farage wants us to ignore Covid and get on with our lives ... or deaths as the case may be.

Farage is just missing the attention.

[Puja]

Whilst I agree that the government has made a total hash of this, groups of people partying in public and private aren’t helping to contain the disease. The rule of six has been in place across England for a while yet there is plenty of evidence for that being ignored. There has to be some personal responsibility in all of this.

While there is always a risk of dickheads, the mishmash of government response has fuelled them. If you look at the first lockdown, the rules were generally pretty well stuck to because the government made a play for it being a matter of patriotism and national pride - we were "Protecting the NHS" and channelling the Blitz spirit and breaking the rules wasn't enforced by police punishment as much as they were by social shaming and peer pressure. People felt it was important, but also that we were genuinely all in it together. Then we changed tack and started prioritising other things - first Dominic Cummings's political career, then saving the entertainment industry and Eat Out To Help Out, then it was town centres and making sure Pret a Manger didn't go out of business and getting back to the office, then going to pubs was all fine and in fact encouraged, then Stanley Johnson not having a mask and that not being a problem.

The government have gone from what was actually a pretty solid start to skipping from policy to policy, all of them giving the impression that things are going back to normal and we beat it. Is it any wonder that they're having a tough time convincing idiots to take it seriously again when they've had the summer of implying that COVID is less important than eating in restaurants, going to the pub, and buying sandwiches from Pret?

I think they stand an outside chance of getting the national response back again by emphasising that this lockdown is "to save Christmas" (although I'd imagine there's a few Muslims a bit fucked off given that Eid Al-Mubarak was apparently unimportant enough to be cancelled with just a few hours' notice), but they're going to need a good 75% of people buying in before it's become a matter of obloquy to be caught breaking it.

Puja

I acknowledge all of that and agree. But since when do we have to have common sense dictated to us by a government? People do need to take some responsibility for their own actions and even in the tiered system, guidance was available. It is often ignored. I believe Cummins should have been sacked, but he wasn’t. Using him as an excuse to ignore restrictions designed to safeguard public health isn’t that bright. Yet many do.

I agree the government is performing very badly. Yet the advice that has been provided was designed to balance the risk of the virus versus the impact to the economy. But it relied people behaving sensibly. Sadly too many cannot.

There's your problem, right there. Any government plan that requires the input of the whole of the nation that relies upon people taking advice and behaving sensibly is doomed to fail, cause the population as a whole are a bunch of selfish, short-sighted, idiots. To quote Men In Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

The annoying thing is that this government is very good at using herd dynamics and manipulating large groups of people - it's what they do! And they did begin really, really well. The problems arose when they lost interest in protecting the NHS and saving lives and decided they'd rather protect the stock market and save dividends.

Puja

[Puja]

Farage wants us to ignore Covid and get on with our lives ... or deaths as the case may be.

Farage is just missing the attention.

Farage is hedging his bets as he'll have no rallies to speak at if Trump loses.

Puja

[Sandydragon]

Farage wants us to ignore Covid and get on with our lives ... or deaths as the case may be.

Farage is just missing the attention.

Farage is hedging his bets as he'll have no rallies to speak at if Trump loses.

Puja

Good point. He needs to earn his living somehow I suppose (shame he can't just find a way of doing so that doesn't screw this country up still further).

[Banquo]

While there is always a risk of dickheads, the mishmash of government response has fuelled them. If you look at the first lockdown, the rules were generally pretty well stuck to because the government made a play for it being a matter of patriotism and national pride - we were "Protecting the NHS" and channelling the Blitz spirit and breaking the rules wasn't enforced by police punishment as much as they were by social shaming and peer pressure. People felt it was important, but also that we were genuinely all in it together. Then we changed tack and started prioritising other things - first Dominic Cummings's political career, then saving the entertainment industry and Eat Out To Help Out, then it was town centres and making sure Pret a Manger didn't go out of business and getting back to the office, then going to pubs was all fine and in fact encouraged, then Stanley Johnson not having a mask and that not being a problem.

The government have gone from what was actually a pretty solid start to skipping from policy to policy, all of them giving the impression that things are going back to normal and we beat it. Is it any wonder that they're having a tough time convincing idiots to take it seriously again when they've had the summer of implying that COVID is less important than eating in restaurants, going to the pub, and buying sandwiches from Pret?

I think they stand an outside chance of getting the national response back again by emphasising that this lockdown is "to save Christmas" (although I'd imagine there's a few Muslims a bit fucked off given that Eid Al-Mubarak was apparently unimportant enough to be cancelled with just a few hours' notice), but they're going to need a good 75% of people buying in before it's become a matter of obloquy to be caught breaking it.

Puja

I acknowledge all of that and agree. But since when do we have to have common sense dictated to us by a government? People do need to take some responsibility for their own actions and even in the tiered system, guidance was available. It is often ignored. I believe Cummins should have been sacked, but he wasn’t. Using him as an excuse to ignore restrictions designed to safeguard public health isn’t that bright. Yet many do.

I agree the government is performing very badly. Yet the advice that has been provided was designed to balance the risk of the virus versus the impact to the economy. But it relied people behaving sensibly. Sadly too many cannot.

There's your problem, right there. Any government plan that requires the input of the whole of the nation that relies upon people taking advice and behaving sensibly is doomed to fail, cause the population as a whole are a bunch of selfish, short-sighted, idiots. To quote Men In Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

The annoying thing is that this government is very good at using herd dynamics and manipulating large groups of people - it's what they do! And they did begin really, really well. The problems arose when they lost interest in protecting the NHS and saving lives and decided they'd rather protect the stock market and save dividends.

Puja

It’s not the listed companies that are really at short term risk, it’s the self employed and small businesses. Plus dividends still prop up most pension funds. So something has to give. I don’t this is a soluble problem once the virus has rooted itself. In short, we appear to be fckd.

[Digby]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

[Banquo]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

Not commercial properties

[Digby]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

Not commercial properties

Their commercial properties will be delivering huge returns to the landlords, everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

[Banquo]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

Not commercial properties

Their commercial properties will be delivering huge returns to the landlords, everything is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Distribution maybe, office and retail not so much.

And I know you are trying to be funny.

[Puja]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

Not commercial properties

Investments can go down in value as well as up. Life is sometimes unfair, even for multi-million pound portfolio owners like Alan Sugar.

Puja

[Son of Mathonwy]

I acknowledge all of that and agree. But since when do we have to have common sense dictated to us by a government? People do need to take some responsibility for their own actions and even in the tiered system, guidance was available. It is often ignored. I believe Cummins should have been sacked, but he wasn’t. Using him as an excuse to ignore restrictions designed to safeguard public health isn’t that bright. Yet many do.

I agree the government is performing very badly. Yet the advice that has been provided was designed to balance the risk of the virus versus the impact to the economy. But it relied people behaving sensibly. Sadly too many cannot.

There's your problem, right there. Any government plan that requires the input of the whole of the nation that relies upon people taking advice and behaving sensibly is doomed to fail, cause the population as a whole are a bunch of selfish, short-sighted, idiots. To quote Men In Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

The annoying thing is that this government is very good at using herd dynamics and manipulating large groups of people - it's what they do! And they did begin really, really well. The problems arose when they lost interest in protecting the NHS and saving lives and decided they'd rather protect the stock market and save dividends.

Puja

It’s not the listed companies that are really at short term risk, it’s the self employed and small businesses. Plus dividends still prop up most pension funds. So something has to give. I don’t this is a soluble problem once the virus has rooted itself. In short, we appear to be fckd.

Ideally we'd lock down until the number of infected was fairly low, then our test, trace and isolate (together with masks and social distancing) would keep it low, or even suppress it completely. Unfortunately that relies on our being able to match the effectiveness of South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand.

So, yes, we're fckd.

[Banquo]

Don't worry about the lack of dividends, the property sections of pension companies are surely now raking it, what can go wrong?

Not commercial properties

Investments can go down in value as well as up. Life is sometimes unfair, even for multi-million pound portfolio owners like Alan Sugar.

Puja

Laugh at the income others depend on if you wish, I guess it’s not your problem yet. Nor mine, for now. If you can show me an alternative way of funding pensions, great.

[morepork]

There is absolutely no reason you can't contain this. The gubmint has to make sure the communication is crystal clear. It's hard on people, but so is having your hospitals collapse. There should be a clear voice of reasoned authority explaining the pros and cons of the action and presenting a plan to support people through it. If it gets rushed through half arsed you will be back to square one as every man and his dog descends on shops to complete a frenzied Xmas death shop. Think of those of us in the USA. The government has taken infection rates and hospital occupancy data out of the public eye and is as we speak doing a "nothing to see here, everything is just fine" act while seeking to impede public access to the ACA:

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5 ... enrollment

Waahey! Private sector innovation to de rescue. What could possibly go wrong?

[Banquo]

There is absolutely no reason you can't contain this. The gubmint has to make sure the communication is crystal clear. It's hard on people, but so is having your hospitals collapse. There should be a clear voice of reasoned authority explaining the pros and cons of the action and presenting a plan to support people through it. If it gets rushed through half arsed you will be back to square one as every man and his dog descends on shops to complete a frenzied Xmas death shop. Think of those of us in the USA. The government has taken infection rates and hospital occupancy data out of the public eye and is as we speak doing a "nothing to see here, everything is just fine" act while seeking to impede public access to the ACA:

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5 ... enrollment

Waahey! Private sector innovation to de rescue. What could possibly go wrong?

Sure you can contain it. Forever? that’s the key question.

[Sandydragon]

There's your problem, right there. Any government plan that requires the input of the whole of the nation that relies upon people taking advice and behaving sensibly is doomed to fail, cause the population as a whole are a bunch of selfish, short-sighted, idiots. To quote Men In Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

The annoying thing is that this government is very good at using herd dynamics and manipulating large groups of people - it's what they do! And they did begin really, really well. The problems arose when they lost interest in protecting the NHS and saving lives and decided they'd rather protect the stock market and save dividends.

Puja

It’s not the listed companies that are really at short term risk, it’s the self employed and small businesses. Plus dividends still prop up most pension funds. So something has to give. I don’t this is a soluble problem once the virus has rooted itself. In short, we appear to be fckd.

Ideally we'd lock down until the number of infected was fairly low, then our test, trace and isolate (together with masks and social distancing) would keep it low, or even suppress it completely. Unfortunately that relies on our being able to match the effectiveness of South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand.

So, yes, we're fckd.

A month of very limited social interaction (which is effectively what we are at this time around as opposed to full isolation except key workers) will drive down infection rates. But if we can't figure out test and trace for when lockdown finishes then we are back to square one, and it will be like groundhog day until the virus mutates to something with no impact or we get a vaccine.

Our problem is that there is this constant pressure to open up again for economic reasons, which leads to a fudge, which leads to another lockdown.

[Banquo]

It’s not the listed companies that are really at short term risk, it’s the self employed and small businesses. Plus dividends still prop up most pension funds. So something has to give. I don’t this is a soluble problem once the virus has rooted itself. In short, we appear to be fckd.

Ideally we'd lock down until the number of infected was fairly low, then our test, trace and isolate (together with masks and social distancing) would keep it low, or even suppress it completely. Unfortunately that relies on our being able to match the effectiveness of South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand.

So, yes, we're fckd.

A month of very limited social interaction (which is effectively what we are at this time around as opposed to full isolation except key workers) will drive down infection rates. But if we can't figure out test and trace for when lockdown finishes then we are back to square one, and it will be like groundhog day until the virus mutates to something with no impact or we get a vaccine.

Our problem is that there is this constant pressure to open up again for economic reasons, which leads to a fudge, which leads to another lockdown.

That cycle is not only economically unsustainable but is taking a terrible toll on mental and physical health. Unfortunately I’m not in possession of a glib answer solution.

[Stom]

Ideally we'd lock down until the number of infected was fairly low, then our test, trace and isolate (together with masks and social distancing) would keep it low, or even suppress it completely. Unfortunately that relies on our being able to match the effectiveness of South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand.

So, yes, we're fckd.

A month of very limited social interaction (which is effectively what we are at this time around as opposed to full isolation except key workers) will drive down infection rates. But if we can't figure out test and trace for when lockdown finishes then we are back to square one, and it will be like groundhog day until the virus mutates to something with no impact or we get a vaccine.

Our problem is that there is this constant pressure to open up again for economic reasons, which leads to a fudge, which leads to another lockdown.

That cycle is not only economically unsustainable but is taking a terrible toll on mental and physical health. Unfortunately I’m not in possession of a glib answer solution.

If the question is:

a) lockdown and sacrifice some businesses
b) don't lockdown and sacrifice some lives

I don't see how there's a question.

The government should be supporting people financially through a lockdown. The government should have put aside funds to deal with these kind of things.

However, successive governments have been economically incompetent. Just so happens successive governments have been Tories...hmm...