|
Post by snowlynx on May 10, 2020 15:39:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Psamathe on May 28, 2020 11:04:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on May 28, 2020 12:58:20 GMT
Does this government have any credibility or integrity left?
Dave
|
|
|
Post by accipiter on May 28, 2020 18:43:03 GMT
Does this government have any credibility or integrity left? Dave The answer is no to that Dave, the problem being if one follows it all through to the finale conclusion then we will all finish up in “permanent lockdown,” either that or walking around wearing space age helmets and environmental suits. Seriously though it’s obvious that those in charge still aren’t taking it seriously hence the Dominic Cummings fiasco, so left to this lot the maximum life span of man could be middle age in the future since it seems to be heading that way at the moment. Now I’m thinking outside of the box here but on the question of all those unemployed at the moment, common sense dictates that they could be put to work on manufacturing and installing energy saving equipment to prevent climate change. This would also require a supply chain employing thousands, I believe it’s called planning for the future which they should have carried out in 2016 in relation to the virus since they were warned about a pandemic back then, but chose to ignore the warning to save money! I know given the situation we all find ourselves in now it’s tragic is it not.
|
|
|
Post by ianr on May 29, 2020 6:17:25 GMT
Which government ever had any credibility anyway? none I can remember I'm with you Alan we should take this as an opportunity to bring home more manufacturing and not rely so heavily on cheap foreign imports, for heavens sake not being able to produce our own PPE makes you laugh if it didn't make you cry first As for Cummings it never ceases to amaze me how thick clever people are 'went for a drive to test his eyes' As for the drive to his parents farm with empty house on it, well who would ask neighbours or friends to look after your child? when you have family ready and willing to do so if needed. I'd have taken the drive ian
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on May 29, 2020 13:38:00 GMT
Within the letter of the law what Dominic Cummings did was OK, but not within the spirit.
I can only assume because he told no one he was going to do it and his wife's account of their experiences with Covid19 makes no mention of where they isolated, he knew he should not really have being do it.
I agree is would be excellent to get home grown manufacturing properly up and running again. However, it would make things more expensive. The only way I can see that being acceptable would be for the average worker to get a fairly large increase in wages.
For the average person to see an increase in pay, those at the top will have take less and I can't see that going down very well.
I can understand the bosses of companies deserve a good salary and not all bosses are earning huge money but I feel there is something wrong when the average chief executive of a FTSE100 company earns 117 times more than the salary of a median worker.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by Psamathe on May 29, 2020 13:54:11 GMT
Within the letter of the law what Dominic Cummings did was OK, but not within the spirit. The "special case" exemption he concocted to be his excuse was apparently a clause added later to allow abuse victims to depart their residence (to extract themselves from the abuse) (from www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/26/exceptional-circumstances-clause-domestic-abuse-victims-dominic-cummings-lockdown) Plus, from the deputy chief medical officer for England, Jenny Harries: the only reason to travel with coronavirus in search of childcare was if there was an extreme risk to life. Clearly in his circumstances there was no "extreme risk to life” so his trip broke rules & guidelines. ( www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/25/dominic-cummings-press-conference-leaves-questions-unanswered). In my opinion he did what he wanted (a trip to a beauty spot on his wife's birthday) and had to concoct the most credible excuse he could once the initial lies didn't hold (and the papers found witnesses). And it was a pretty feeble "concoction" but he broke the law (Police finding, Police always have to use "might" and "alleged" because Police don't decide the guilt/innocence in the UK, the courts do and they just decide is a reasonable chance ...). Ian
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on May 31, 2020 16:14:23 GMT
As it seems quite a few people around here and many other from news reports do not know what 6 is, and have no idea what is meant by 2m, I wonder how long we will have to wait for the next peak in cases of Covid19.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by Psamathe on May 31, 2020 20:53:22 GMT
As it seems quite a few people around here and many other from news reports do not know what 6 is, and have no idea what is meant by 2m, I wonder how long we will have to wait for the next peak in cases of Covid19. Dave I think a large part of the problem is that rules keep changing every day. Radio alarm clock turned on 9:00am news this morning and surprise announcement that some group can now mat some other group but only one of them outside the house. Confusd about details but apparently nobody knew it was coming. And garage forecourts can open but no idea when ... What was very straightforward has now become unbelievably complex and is changing daily so I'm not surprised some (incl. me) don't know what the rules are this morning and what they'll be this afternoon. Even without every changing rules, it depends what "group" you are. Westminster Alumni and seems a completely different set of rules from "The Plebs" and none of the announcements say what groups the rules apply to and don't apply to. That said, my personal observations is that around here a lot of "Westminster Alumni" who are not under the same rules. Ian
|
|
|
Post by Psamathe on May 31, 2020 21:08:26 GMT
What worries me about the relaxation is that politicians don't seem to understand the impacts of R0. They simplistically seem to think "above one bad, below one good". But an R0 of 0.9 means a lot more people catch it than an R0 of e.g. 0.3. Lower the R0, fewer people catch it and thus fewer people die. Our politicians seem to regard R0 of 0.9 the same as 0.1 as both are below 1 so in their eyes "doesn't matter, it's below 1".
And then they don't appreciate "error bars" or "uncertainty", etc.. They don't appreciate that saying R0 is between 0.7 and 0.9 involves an estimate and the quoted numbers don't represent upper and lower limits but a confidence interval (or similar - confess my statistics is "rusty").
So I think there is a high risk of a bad upsurge in cases because R0 is rather high and it's estimate subject to error, rules are confusing to people give-up even bothering about them, the "Track & Trace" wont be properly running for another month (according to the person responsible for it), app is nowhere to be seen (probably because everybody that told NHSX they should have followed Google/Apple architecture was right and NHSX were wrong (again), testing is still not working (report today that only 15 per cent of care home staff have been tested for coronavirus since the start of the outbreak), Cummings effect "why should I when they don't, etc..
Ian
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on Jun 1, 2020 10:38:33 GMT
Agree with both your post above, Ian.
Rather than going from the fairly restrictive, but I think correct, lock down with the Stay At Home message, to 'you can go anywhere you like to exercise' was IMO the wrong move.
I think it would have been better to say you can travel up to X miles(perhaps 15) and it would have been easier to police.
The test/track was a fiasco and its earlier than announced introduction looked like knee jerk reaction from the PM when he appeared ruffled by questioning from Jeremy Hunt during the Committee meeting last week. It also appeared to be a surprise to some who were recruited to run the scheme.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by Tringa on Jun 16, 2020 5:59:59 GMT
Looking at some of the news coverage today of non-essential shops reopening I think I must be odd.
I can't understand why anyone would queue just to go into a shop.
Dave
|
|
|
Post by ianr on Jun 16, 2020 7:09:17 GMT
Looking at some of the news coverage today of non-essential shops reopening I think I must be odd. I can't understand why anyone would queue just to go into a shop. Dave I was saying just this same thing to my wife when she arrived home from work yesterday, got all the nods and agreements. Then her and the daughter buggered off to matalan although they've been open a week or two here. ian
|
|
|
Post by Psamathe on Jun 16, 2020 9:20:53 GMT
To me it all highlights the stupidity of our society. The clue is in the adjective "non-essential".
Westminster seems to be listening to lots of lobbying to get social distancing down to 1m so pubs and restaurants can re-open whilst we are completely unable to re-open schools (no "flexibility" proposed for schools, but Tim Martin picks up the phone and ...).
And a society that falls to pieces when the required perpetual grown drops marginally and briefly below 0% and when it does it's the most vulnerable that suffer and still Westminster cannot see the flaw in "perpetual growth". And all their efforts seem directed are getting back to the same unsustainable madness a.s.a.p.
Ian
|
|
|
Post by ianr on Jun 17, 2020 6:37:55 GMT
My other half works in a school and the daughter also works with children, make no mistake there's no such thing as social distancing with young children.
We can't all rely on a government 1 or 2 meter bumper bar people are going to have to use there own initiative and get on with life.
Living in a bubble is not a long term option and a vaccine may or may not happen ian
|
|