Jump to content
Wanderers Ways - passion not fashion

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

The last slide on that post. The answer to 'what's killing people' and 'what's killing the economy' are both largely the same thing. Control the virus, you'll be ok. Get fucked by it, and your economy goes with too.

Seems obvious if you’ve managed to keep the virus out then you would fair better. However once the virus is out how do you then react? 

Looking at that graph we have fucked our economy by at least double when compared to the US, Brazil and Sweden. If you’d offer me similar death rates to what we have had but with only half the economic damage I’d snap your arm off 

People seem to think your heartless if you believe the economy should come before healthcare. However healthcare rely’s on the Economy (as does Education, welfare etc etc). You show me a country that has a shit economy but has a great health service? 

What we are doing now will damage our economy for generations, the impact on public finances will lead to savage cuts in spending in the NHS that will kill many more people than we are saving now. If you want to save lives, put the economy first and protect the NHS for years to come 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 30.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Escobarp

    2363

  • Spider

    1767

  • Tonge moor green jacket

    1631

  • Mr Grey

    1621

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My uncle lost his battle to this in Royal Bolton this morning, so he will be one of today’s numbers.  last rites over the phone held by a nurse with no family there. made an exception yester

That was one of the loveliest things to ever happen. Stood in my garden sobbing like a baby! Proud to work for the NHS 👏👏👏👏❤️

I’ve sat with my mum who is slipping away, literally breathing her last today. She idolises the Queen, and whilst she didn’t in all likelihood hear that, I know she would have loved every single

Posted Images

1 hour ago, birch-chorley said:

Keeping the hospitality sector open for 40m  people would be much better than shutting it to protect 15m 

Or...

Keeping the hospitality sector open for 40m people isn’t an option if it means asking 15m people to stay home indefinitely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wiggy said:

Or...

Keeping the hospitality sector open for 40m people isn’t an option if it means asking 15m people to stay home indefinitely.

Ok, ask 66m to stay at home instead, seems a bizarre logic to me 

The vulnerable now will be the same ones who are vulnerable when we get out the other side of this mess. They will be the ones paying the price with a vastly diminished health service that they rely so heavily on 

Allow 40m to continue to function in some form in the economy, reduce job losses, reduce welfare spending, maintain better tax coming in, maintain the health service as we know it, protect the vulnerable over a longer period of time 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We dont even know who are the ones that need protecting. Some people simply don't contract or show no symptoms.

Fella that works for me got it, his wife didnt. Theres thousands of cases like that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Ok, ask 66m to stay at home instead, seems a bizarre logic to me 

The vulnerable now will be the same ones who are vulnerable when we get out the other side of this mess. They will be the ones paying the price with a vastly diminished health service that they rely so heavily on 

Allow 40m to continue to function in some form in the economy, reduce job losses, reduce welfare spending, maintain better tax coming in, maintain the health service as we know it, protect the vulnerable over a longer period of time 

All correct

I hope we can gather rational decision making soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, birch-chorley said:

Ok, ask 66m to stay at home instead, seems a bizarre logic to me 

The vulnerable now will be the same ones who are vulnerable when we get out the other side of this mess. They will be the ones paying the price with a vastly diminished health service that they rely so heavily on 

Allow 40m to continue to function in some form in the economy, reduce job losses, reduce welfare spending, maintain better tax coming in, maintain the health service as we know it, protect the vulnerable over a longer period of time 

I promise you I’m not trying to be difficult. I don’t think most people would have a problem asking the “vulnerable” to shield if we were talking about a known period of time. Or if it meant others could carry on do the “essentials”. I think what people have an issue with, is the suggestion by some that the vulnerable should shield forever so that others can go back to living what we might consider a “normal” life.

The life we all live for the foreseeable is going to be shit. Anyone who thinks any different is deluded and / or massively selfish. Personally I think we need to find the balance which allows us to keep the virus under control without meaning 15 million people face the threat of 3 years, 5 years or longer stuck at home.

And this is all assuming you think we can actually lock those people away in safety.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, wiggy said:

I promise you I’m not trying to be difficult. I don’t think most people would have a problem asking the “vulnerable” to shield if we were talking about a known period of time. Or if it meant others could carry on do the “essentials”. I think what people have an issue with, is the suggestion by some that the vulnerable should shield forever so that others can go back to living what we might consider a “normal” life.

The life we all live for the foreseeable is going to be shit. Anyone who thinks any different is deluded and / or massively selfish. Personally I think we need to find the balance which allows us to keep the virus under control without meaning 15 million people face the threat of 3 years, 5 years or longer stuck at home.

And this is all assuming you think we can actually lock those people away in safety.

I don’t think we can lock them away safely, it wouldn’t be perfect, non of the measures are, but it would protect them to a degree whilst supporting the economy more so than we are now 

Your now talking 3 to 5 years, I’m talking until Spring / Summer when we hopefully have a vaccine 

If the vaccine takes 3-5 years then we wouldn’t possibly be able to go on as we are shutting stuff down left right and centre. We would simply run out of money long before we got to the end of year 2 let alone 3. That would mean doctors, nurses, teachers and the rest of the public sector not getting paid. A full economic collapse like that won’t do the vulnerable any favours either would it 

If we haven't got a vaccine in 2021 then the only other way would be herd immunity surely? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All massively depressing isn’t it? Even when people disagree on how to manage this, for the most part they want the same thing - to look after as many people as possible. I know you do as well. One thing I think we can all agree on is that we’re going to be needing Rudy for a good while yet!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
11 minutes ago, wiggy said:

All massively depressing isn’t it? Even when people disagree on how to manage this, for the most part they want the same thing - to look after as many people as possible. I know you do as well. One thing I think we can all agree on is that we’re going to be needing Rudy for a good while yet!

Sod post briefing questions. We need Rudy with a fine selection of busters and some soothing music.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wiggy said:

All massively depressing isn’t it? Even when people disagree on how to manage this, for the most part they want the same thing - to look after as many people as possible. I know you do as well. One thing I think we can all agree on is that we’re going to be needing Rudy for a good while yet!

Devastating really 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Sage?

 

2 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Van Tam and Whitty?

 

Both correct. But do we think , and this is a genuine question , if labour were in power they would be so keen given they would need to find the billions extra to fund it?
 

Personally I think not. But for balance I think the tories as opposition would be advocating a full lockdown too. It’s political gamesmanship 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Site Supporter
16 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Sage?

Correct. Can see the reasoning behind local efforts though. Rates did come down here in Bolton, once we went into our own tougher restrictions, took a while maybe but did work.

If everyone follows it properly, then rates should come down. As will areas with low rates should their rates continue upwards. 

The longer things aren't adhered to, the more likely a national one is.

Just hope that the latest figures are evidence of a slowing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Biggish Dave said:

These videos in the papers of vaccines being made, would drugs companies be making so much if they weren’t getting signed off?

No idea of the protocol 

I doubt in usual cases they would produce so many before approval but 'needs must' with the wuflu. 

I'm no anti vaxxer but I won't be front of the queue for one that has been knocked up in 9 months and was produced before the clinical trials had even finished. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m really fed up of it all now.

My kids are losing the most important years of their lives to hanging around with me. Shit for them that.

Numbers are dropping round here, I’d say we’re closer to tier one than two.

fucked off

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Sage?

Not quite

They nearly said that a few weeks ago, but not quite, it was heavily caveated and they said they were short of data

 

"the evidence base into the effectiveness and harms of these interventions is weak"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love stuff like that, post some facts and let you join the dots that there's something not right. You think it's your idea and believe it more than if they'd just come out with it straight. Rev and the Makers need to fuck off back to the 2 weeks in 2005 that anyone gave a fuck about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.