Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Few people on here who look down on others, think they are thick, stupid, less educated and so on. Not experienced this with GB but with some others I have, it's horrible.

Sorry to hear that. I hope you don't include me in that group.

My take is the opposite, though. There are a couple of annoying pedants, both decent lads, but one occasionally so relentless I have had to put him on ignore. But I don't recall ever being talked down to. And almost everyone is reasonable and will engage in a conversation. The other 15 I have on ignore.

Meanwhile there are some people only too ready to waft an ill-founded whimsy into a serious conversation as if it is fact or at very least just as valid as anything anyone else has said. Sometimes it is just nonsense and if so it should be called out. I suspect that some of the people who post opinion in this way may get shirty if rebuked. Well, to paraphrase an ex neighbour's ten year old kid when her mother complained the ferret had bitten her, they should 'be more ****ing careful' with what they post; tough luck.

Nevertheless I have apologised on numerous occasions for getting things wrong. If you're wrong, you're wrong. It isn't a competition.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Back on topic Boris's message did seem to me to be "get back to work and make sure you drive there".

I'm sure Dominic intended it to be a little more nuanced, but it wasn't.

The message was "get back to work if you can get there safely and your employer can implement the Covid-19 safety guidelines". People should be "actively encouraged" to go to work if they cannot work at home.

Essentially, he has put the emphasis onto the employer to decide whether it is safe for them to open up again and encourage their employees to go back to work. The employee has to decide whether they can get to work safely or not. What guidelines, if any, have been issued to employers to resolve the numerous conflicts/issues that this will throw up is not clear. More clarity on these guidelines tomorrow perhaps?

 

[Titanic]

Yes, you mentioned you were a scientist before.

I, like many others have seen doctors and scientists who are against it though, you disagree with them, fair enough. I don’t.

As for the people I know who have left NSC, they are definitely not troubled characters. Yes, I would expect the amount of people on here to rise with the increasing size of the fanbase.

Do you have an example you could share with us?

 

[Weststander]

I've seen this has really riled you. I agree the fines should be bigger. Sadly, think the poorer individuals will be caught out far more than the middle class/wealthy rules breakers.

People make choices. Driving to another county for a day at the beach, setting up a bbq, holding a party ... caught and fined, it’s hard lines.

 

[Weststander]

The message was "get back to work if you can get there safely and your employer can implement the Covid-19 safety guidelines". People should be "actively encouraged" to go to work if they cannot work at home.

Essentially, he has put the emphasis onto the employer to decide whether it is safe for them to open up again and encourage their employees to go back to work. The employee has to decide whether they can get to work safely or not. What guidelines, if any, have been issued to employers to resolve the numerous conflicts/issues that this will throw up is not clear. More clarity on these guidelines tomorrow perhaps?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-to-employers-and-businesses-about-covid-19/guidance-for-employers-and-businesses-on-coronavirus-covid-19

They’ve been out for over a month. Used successfully by supermarkets, distribution businesses.

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

If you’re not in a union of some sort then there will never better time to be in one after that speech.

 

[Guinness Boy]

The message was "get back to work if you can get there safely and your employer can implement the Covid-19 safety guidelines". People should be "actively encouraged" to go to work if they cannot work at home.

Essentially, he has put the emphasis onto the employer to decide whether it is safe for them to open up again and encourage their employees to go back to work. The employee has to decide whether they can get to work safely or not. What guidelines, if any, have been issued to employers to resolve the numerous conflicts/issues that this will throw up is not clear. More clarity on these guidelines tomorrow perhaps?

Clarity would be nice. What we're seeing here is the beginning of the end of furlough and mortgage holidays. The plebs have been told to get back to it or else. And they all have vans don't they?

But, for balance, I'm not sure how much longer the government could have carried on bailing out the country without a decade long depression and I suspect workers need the money a lot more than bosses.

I just hope no one pretends that announcement was about health though. Either way you want to look at it, it was about the economy.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Sorry to hear that. I hope you don't include me in that group.

My take is the opposite, though. There are a couple of annoying pedants, both decent lads, but one occasionally so relentless I have had to put him on ignore. But I don't recall ever being talked down to. And almost everyone is reasonable and will engage in a conversation. The other 15 I have on ignore.

Meanwhile there are some people only too ready to waft an ill-founded whimsy into a serious conversation as if it is fact or at very least just as valid as anything anyone else has said. Sometimes it is just nonsense and if so it should be called out. I suspect that some of the people who post opinion in this way may get shirty if rebuked. Well, to paraphrase an ex neighbour's ten year old kid when her mother complained the ferret had bitten her, they should 'be more ****ing careful' with what they post; tough luck.

Nevertheless I have apologised on numerous occasions for getting things wrong. If you're wrong, you're wrong. It isn't a competition.

No your not in that group. If there is one I can't stand is when people try to prove how intelligent they are by putting others down, trying to make them look stupid on this forum.

 

[KZNSeagull]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guidance-to-employers-and-businesses-about-covid-19/guidance-for-employers-and-businesses-on-coronavirus-covid-19

They’ve been out for over a month. Used successfully by supermarkets, distribution businesses.

Aha. Thanks for that!

 

[Weststander]

Clarity would be nice. What we're seeing here is the beginning of the end of furlough and mortgage holidays. The plebs have been told to get back to it or else. And they all have vans don't they?

But, for balance, I'm not sure how much longer the government could have carried on bailing out the country without a decade long depression and I suspect workers need the money a lot more than bosses.

I just hope no one pretends that announcement was about health though. Either way you want to look at it, it was about the economy.

Both Sky and BBC described tonight’s announcement as “very little change, pigeon steps”.

So it must’ve been about health. Not much will alter tomorrow, most people will still be at home one way or another.

The gutted people tonight will be the increasingly angry lot, copying their redneck bosom buddies, calling this an affront on civil liberties.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Do you have an example you could share with us?

I'd be interested in this, too, [MENTION=33983]BeHereNow[/MENTION]

I have googled this and found nothing. We have the Swedish bloke who thinks we should catch the virus and hope for the best but Sweden, as we all know, is Sweden, with a sparse population, mainly of dope smoking thirty somethings who can't go more than a few hours without a shag, and there would be mass conniption fits if order were imposed.

What we need is proper scientists with data and credibility, explaining how fewer people would die without the lockdown.

I call.....bullshit!

Edit here is something from the bulletin of atomic scientists. Nope. No libertarian anti-lockdown scientists here:

https://thebulletin.org/2020/04/the...pidemic-lockdowns-before-these-are-different/

 

[beorhthelm]

Clarity would be nice. What we're seeing here is the beginning of the end of furlough and mortgage holidays. The plebs have been told to get back to it or else. And they all have vans don't they?

But, for balance, I'm not sure how much longer the government could have carried on bailing out the country without a decade long depression and I suspect workers need the money a lot more than bosses.

I just hope no one pretends that announcement was about health though. Either way you want to look at it, it was about the economy.

its err'ing to cautious on health side, could have been more about opening business and people going out and about more.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Both Sky and BBC described tonight’s announcement as “very little change, pigeon steps”.

So it must’ve been about health. Not much will alter tomorrow, most people will still be at home one way or another.

The angry people tonight will be the increasingly angry lot, copying their rednecks bosom buddies, calling this an affront on civil liberties.

And Mrs Angry from Weston-Super-Mare who wanted Boris to specify a date as to when her hotel can re-open.

 

[Weststander]

And Mrs Angry from Weston-Super-Mare who wanted Boris to specify a date as to when her hotel can re-open.

I missed the later aftermath to Boris’s speech. Was that questions from the public directed to him, was it on the TV?

(There’s an angry Weston hotelier Nicki Slade on BBC News24 now ... is that the lady?).

 

[KZNSeagull]

I missed the later aftermath to Boris’s speech. Was that questions from the public directed to him, was it on the TV?

(There’s an angry Weston hotelier Nicki Slade on BBC News24 now ... is that the lady?).

Yes, that's the one.

 

[Weststander]

its err'ing to cautious on health side, could have been more about opening business and people going out and about more.

This.

Myself and many others over predicted tonight’s announcement ... wrongly believing that all shops, garden centres, barbers, outdoor cafes and salons were to open in a couple of days.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

And Mrs Angry from Weston-Super-Mare who wanted Boris to specify a date as to when her hotel can re-open.

Jeffrey Archer's mum?

Only time will tell.

But be careful what you wish for.

 

[Eeyore]

Actually, I've only got one question after watching tonight. When can I get my f***ing hair cut ?

 

[Coldeanseagull]

Well, I listened, I read, I didn't understand what was being said?

 

[sparkie]

Actually, I've only got one question after watching tonight. When can I get my f***ing hair cut ?

2021.