Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
xena said:
Seems this virus is fussy

Didn't everywhere get shut down in March when it was rife in London whilst up north we had hardly any infection whats the difference now .
Click to expand...

I agree. It should just have been London, but that Ferguson report of 500,000 deaths scared the crap out of Sage and the Government, hence we were all bounced into it.....
 
Oh Mike. lol



EkW_74WXgAUXAGg
 
Without getting into the political arguments about a need for national lockdown why are the localised lockdowns in the areas with massive infection rates so lax in comparison to the initial lockdown measures? Going off various sites it seems that the current localised spikes are dwarfing the initial outbreak (per 100,000) so why are shops, schools and hospitality still widely open?

Wouldn't a short, sharp shock be more effective than prolonged ineffective measures which clearly can't work if large numbers are mixing?
 
peteblue said:
The problem of course being that the ‘scientists’ are not concerned with the financial implications, so they can go as overboard as they wish in their Lockdown demands. Now if it was suggested that the first cutback to help pay for all this was to abolish PHE and a variety of civil service jobs, you would quickly see the scientific advice change.....
Click to expand...

If you can contain this virus, you suffer much less economic damage.

If you don’t contain it, you suff much more economic damage.

We should be therefore looking to contain this virus, not doing whatever the government you support have been doing these last ten months.
 
JEBUS_LIVES said:
Any chance of you backing up yours?
Click to expand...

My experience has shown me precisely what scientists are motivated by, and that is proving that they are correct or generating interest to gain new funding for new scientific work. However they have to be dragged into the real world when it comes to finance, generating income and paying their way.

Now perhaps you could back up your statement with how your own experience as a planner has given you an insight into the motives of the scientists, who you seem to believe have the economy as one of their major drivers....
 
peteblue said:
The problem of course being that the ‘scientists’ are not concerned with the financial implications, so they can go as overboard as they wish in their Lockdown demands. Now if it was suggested that the first cutback to help pay for all this was to abolish PHE and a variety of civil service jobs, you would quickly see the scientific advice change.....
Click to expand...

:Blink:

The SAGE committee membership is published online Pete. Spoiler: not a lot of civil servants in there.
 
wtf is going on here in Manchester i do not know , we are in one minute out the next , seems like burnham now wants extra time , just fooking announce and then we know ffs
 
peteblue said:
My experience has shown me precisely what scientists are motivated by, and that is proving that they are correct or generating interest to gain new funding for new scientific work. However they have to be dragged into the real world when it comes to finance, generating income and paying their way.

Now perhaps you could back up your statement with how your own experience as a planner has given you an insight into the motives of the scientists, who you seem to believe have the economy as one of their major drivers....
Click to expand...

Bullets and bombs make people bleed, damn you Scientific community and your research...
 
ClausThomsen said:
Without getting into the political arguments about a need for national lockdown why are the localised lockdowns in the areas with massive infection rates so lax in comparison to the initial lockdown measures? Going off various sites it seems that the current localised spikes are dwarfing the initial outbreak (per 100,000) so why are shops, schools and hospitality still widely open?

Wouldn't a short, sharp shock be more effective than prolonged ineffective measures which clearly can't work if large numbers are mixing?
Click to expand...

It seems it’s a question of balance for health and the economy. Also, the death rate, while increasing, it nowhere near the rate earlier in the year, so having been bounced by a dubious forecast of 500,000 deaths into the last lockdown, I’m not surprised that the government is being a bit more nuanced this time. However, there is nothing to stop the people of Liverpool or Manchester wearing a mask, keeping a social distance and sanitising their hands to help keep the infection rate down, because that’s what is happening around the rest of the country (cities excluded)......
 
tsubaki said:
If you can contain this virus, you suffer much less economic damage.

If you don’t contain it, you suff much more economic damage.

We should be therefore looking to contain this virus, not doing whatever the government you support have been doing these last ten months.
Click to expand...

The Government are looking to contain it, wherever it is....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top