Please sign.

bluerobert · October 7, 2020

Igloo1 said:
I'm sure all of the main parties Con, Lab and Lib have very wealthy figures in them with big investments in companies like BA, EasyJet etc (or have family with big investment portfolios) and receive money donated to them individually as well as to their parties or funnelled to them by lobbyists. Air travel is big business no doubt.

There's also a tax incentive for government from flying in that you pay passenger air duty with every flight. You don't get that with going to the match.

The rights and wrongs of it is where people are going astray. I don't care what the rules are. I'm saying that the reasoning behind it is false. It is a lie. The science and risk is definitely no worse in stadiums than from flying. How could it be? Not only are you outdoors in the stadium, but you are only with supporters for what? 90 minutes. You're on a plane breathing the exact same air as everyone else on the plane for between 2-14 hours.

That’s the point It’s not about the risk it’s about the reward. The science is the same so what possible reasons would they have to stop people going to games other than the reasons I’ve given you? It’s not a conspiracy mate, 44% of new infections are occurring in schools, you can’t close them. A vast majority of the countries GDP is directly linked to air travel so you can’t close that. The other option to stop the spread is to stop social gatherings. The virus was practically none existent in Merseyside till the Liverpool v Atletico match. It’s about taking acceptable risk, I think the vast majority of responses to signing the petition on here are telling you the risk of going to a match and any impact that it may have on the spread is one people are willing to forgo given other unavoidable activities.
The vast majority of business don’t donate to

Parties that go against their interests. Labours biggest funder is unite, not a business but a union.

Part of your argument is the tax generated by air travel, I didn’t directly say that but you’ve basically just added to my argument

PhilM · October 7, 2020

The argument that ‘most would die anyway’ is the one I find most perverse. The Jews during WW2 would have eventually died, so does it justify speeding it up?

The people saying it aren’t far off genocide although obviously they wouldn’t like to admit that.

bluerobert · October 7, 2020

PhilM said:
The argument that ‘most would die anyway’ is the one I find most perverse. The Jews during WW2 would have eventually died, so does it justify speeding it up?

The people saying it aren’t far off genocide although obviously they wouldn’t like to admit that.

I mean comparing them to Nazis is a bit of a reach even for me mate. Not understanding the implications of what they’re saying is not the same as condoning the genocide of 6 million people. I understand what you’re saying but I don’t think being a naive is the same as being evil.

People very easily call those with out there views Nazis but I think as a society we need to stop and think about what we’re actually doing when that happens. The more we call those with opposing views Nazis the more we lesson the impact of what the Nazis did

Homer Jay · October 7, 2020

I was against project restart as I thought that it was a bit grotesque to play football when so many people were dying and so many businesses were going to the wall due to lack of income. I never bought the whole argument that it was good for public morale.

I’m against allowing large gatherings when I can’t even see my nan at the moment. For what it’s worth I think football without fans is pointless and you’ll see more whacky / freak results over the course of the season as whatever this is right now, it’s Not football.