Jump to content

DeanoL

GOLD member
  • Content Count

    3,583
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

610 Excellent

About DeanoL

  • Rank
    staying out for the summer

Recent Profile Visitors

4,014 profile views
  1. No high street vouchers or eat out to help out part 2.
  2. This might be nonsense but maybe some of the more severe reactions people are having are people *who currently have COVID* - loads of people must be getting jabs who have a mild or asymptomatic infection, there's still plenty of cases around. I can imagine the bodies reaction there being somewhat different?
  3. The money coming in from income tax, NI and VAT all go up if more people are in work and down if they're not.
  4. I read this a few months back: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B08K3XDGJV/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1 I'd be lying if I said I understood it completely, but her argument is that we already have massive state intervention in the economy - that we're able to spend these billions on the COVID response proves it. And that the money we borrow is effectively borrowed from large companies and industry, who therefore have a vested interest in the country succeeding, so you have an economy that is already planned by banks, corporations and the government. The notion that we actual
  5. It's absolutely the right thing to do but I can see the issues with it - especially if it's just a free for all like last time. Because a month's holiday on 80% pay in August with everything open is a very different proposition to what furlough has been so far. I can certainly see more creative firms using it to "reward" staff with free holidays if no restrictions are in place. I think hospitality will want to reopen quickly for sure, but they are far from the only place furlough has been used. We mostly see it as companies "shutting down" and furloughing staff but the reality is loads
  6. Whenever you say stuff like that I mentally substitute "eggheads" or "nerds" with "people that are smarter than me". Anyone else getting frustrated should try it! It's an option. Especially for the restrictions around meeting people in homes and such. From an economic perspective it's less clear cut. There's a benefit to having continued lockdown: it pushes NHS numbers down even further, letting the NHS get back to normal more quickly, meaning we can be much more resilient if something else unexpected crops up: a new variant that can escape the vaccine, or makes children ill
  7. In no order: 1. Comedy gigs 2. Board game days with friends 3. Seeing friends who don't live nearby 4. Live music 5. Escape rooms
  8. While that's fair there are people running where that is not possible. If someone is legging it round a park then that makes total sense, but if they're running to the park, on a footpath that's only 1.5m wide, and on one side of the road only - I can see the argument for wearing a mask.
  9. What constitutes a nightmare though? I don't think having to queue for an hour or so is bad, in global pandemic. I'd agree the 6 hours queues mentioned in that article aren't acceptable but that's more from a customer service perspective than anything else. The thing to bear in mind is that you don't really want border guards sat around doing nothing. And the fact that we're not seeing the queues get longer and longer and longer with people camped out for days, means that we are eventually clearing people through before the next lot of people arrive. If in a given day there are only
  10. I think in part because actually the airports aren't that busy, and the staff they have are sufficient for 99% of the time, just occasionally weird circumstances (like loads of people not having the testing kits, or delays and multiple flights landing together) mean larger queues. You'd be having to take people off furlough and have them travel in to work just to cover the occasionally busy shift.
  11. Well then that argument goes the other way - it's safe to be queueing for hours also, as everyone in that terminal had passed a test.
  12. I would if those people then started complaining the park they were in was overcrowded and there should be people manning the gates to stop other people getting in as it's unsafe. I think it's true to say the UK government don't really care about air travelers. There's no way to travel safely on a plane, regardless of how essential your journey is. You're in a confined space with others, sharing air for usually 2 hours or more. That risk is already acknowledged, which is why when you return you have to isolate for 10 days, regardless of where you come from. So you shouldn't be able t
  13. I wonder if some of this is on purpose to dissuade people from travelling. I do find the complaining a bit rich - these people were all willing to travel on the plane in close proximity to other people to then complain about being in proximity to people in a queue. It does seem like Heathrow were overwhelmed by the numbers which were higher than expected, also seems to be something else going on, from the article:
  14. I don't have any personal experience of being able to run without sweating and overheating but I'd imagine it's related to being fit!
  15. The scientists don't (or at least shouldn't) be making the call on what is and isn't appropriate though. All they can really do is model different options and give an indication of the number of deaths each will cause. It's then up to government to make the call on what is and isn't acceptable.
×
×
  • Create New...