When will this shit end?

[BobWillis]

21 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It’s almost like we won’t see complete normality by Easter.

We won’t see complete normality by this time next year. 

[stuartbert two hats]

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

I was being a bit arch as he has a point that places are being treated differently based on if they're North or South (or maybe if they argued with the government).

But it plays into that narrative that lockdown is bad and a punishment, when lockdown is to protect people in that area from dying.

There's a lot more to it, and I've certainly argued as much in terms of the Christmas loosening of restrictions being needed, but you can't get round the fact that more people are going to die if an area is in Tier 2 than if it's in Tier 3. Regardless of how "well" it's doing.

Obviously there's a degree of balancing that against the economy but it's just that, a balance. Burnham has been almost entirely one-note throughout this, only seeming to care about having the loosest restrictions possible for Manchester. At no point has he even engaged with the fact that looser restrictions mean more deaths. More deaths of the people of Manchester.

I agree with everything you've said apart from the last point. Burnham's been a lot more nuanced than that - the big fight he had was about providing enough economic support when furlough had briefly finished without any suggestion it would return.  It wasn't about wanting looser restrictions, it was about being left with no economic alternative than to keep trading if the Government didn't provide any support.

And the trajectory when we came out of lockdown looked really good for GM, especially when you take into account that Tier 3 worked really well before the lockdown.  But it didn't work so well this time and Tier 2 would be worse, he should recognise that.

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, funkychick2007 said:

@crazyfool1 is Taunton and west Somerset still Tier 2, sedgemoor is and North Somerset is going down to Tier 2!! Work is so busy I can’t keep up with the thread!! Thanks!! 👍🏻🎄 

yep thats correct 🙂 

[Radiochicken]

40 minutes ago, Homer said:

Gove live on bbc now: chances of a deal are less than 50%.

 

[gigpusher]

4 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I was being a bit arch as he has a point that places are being treated differently based on if they're North or South (or maybe if they argued with the government).

But it plays into that narrative that lockdown is bad and a punishment, when lockdown is to protect people in that area from dying.

There's a lot more to it, and I've certainly argued as much in terms of the Christmas loosening of restrictions being needed, but you can't get round the fact that more people are going to die if an area is in Tier 2 than if it's in Tier 3. Regardless of how "well" it's doing.

Obviously there's a degree of balancing that against the economy but it's just that, a balance. Burnham has been almost entirely one-note throughout this, only seeming to care about having the loosest restrictions possible for Manchester. At no point has he even engaged with the fact that looser restrictions mean more deaths. More deaths of the people of Manchester.

The mistake was ever letting London be tier 2. The tier 3 measures are what are needed for health but they do need to protect and support businesses and not just when London is impacted. 

[efcfanwirral]

14 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I've generally been supportive of Burnham in all this, but the numbers don't suggest in the slightest that Tier 2 would be safe in GM. It's a recipe for exponential growth.

I'm with you - imagine the "celebrations" on Saturday night if Manchester went into tier 2

If by some miracle the area is looking ok 3 weeks after Christmas, that is the time

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

 

But it plays into that narrative that lockdown is bad and a punishment, when lockdown is to protect people in that area from dying.

 

Its because people are sick and tired of lockdowns and i think some people ( not yourself per se) have a go at people when they say so by insinuating they want more people to die. 

It is a horrible thing to institute on people, and i think that should be acknowledged more tbh.

[zahidf]

6 minutes ago, BobWillis said:

We won’t see complete normality by this time next year. 

why?

[Gilgamesh69]

8 minutes ago, BobWillis said:

We won’t see complete normality by this time next year. 

Ouch thats heavy lad. You better be wrong

[Obiginnaw]

I don’t really blame the government for being careful over Christmas, and although it’s hospitality has unjustly taken the brunt of the restrictions, I think that over Christmas it’s the right decision, as much as I love a Christmas pint and a Boxing Day pub stint watching the football. If people are travelling to meet other households , and then going to hospitality venues on top of that, then January would be far worse than what is already predicted.

I think it would be fair to judge in a months time how we’re going , but the issue is I’ve said that to myself about 8/9 times now 

[Guest]

I think people’s desperation for normality clouds their judgement as to when that normality can realistically be achieved. By normality I mean back to how things were with absolutely no restrictions or measures in place. That almost certainly won’t be this Easter coming up. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

I think a January lockdown is a pretty good idea tbh. Get through Christmas and then shut down when there’s very little to do anyway. Would mean I can’t take my Mrs out for her birthday which is a shame, but it would help the NHS manage the post Christmas case load and kick start the vaccination campaign more.

 

I’d like to see a lockdown from Monday 4th January for 4-6 weeks. 

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I think a January lockdown is a pretty good idea tbh. Get through Christmas and then shut down when there’s very little to do anyway. Would mean I can’t take my Mrs out for her birthday which is a shame, but it would help the NHS manage the post Christmas case load and kick start the vaccination campaign more.

 

I’d like to see a lockdown from Monday 4th January for 4-6 weeks. 

And it needs to be a harder lockdown im afraid to say ... I hate to say it but needs to be enforced better too .... 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

And it needs to be a harder lockdown im afraid to say ... I hate to say it but needs to be enforced better too .... 

How much harder? Schools and workplaces closed? Exercise limits? 

[steviewevie]

When do people think social distancing in pubs, clubs and gigs will end?

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

How much harder? Schools and workplaces closed? Exercise limits? 

I hate to say it and I know many won't agree ... and yes Ive no kids .... but at least Secondary .... workplaces like the first one essential ones only the rest wfh .... not keen on exercise limits outdoors .... but that is what some countries have done along with curfews ... we haven't taken that approach .... the problem is that the more people are out and about the more people continue as they were ... you stand out more when you are out if not many others are ...

[zahidf]

11 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

And it needs to be a harder lockdown im afraid to say ... I hate to say it but needs to be enforced better too .... 

Police dont want to enforce the current lockdown. Good luck getting them to enforce harsher ones.

You need to take the population with you. People say they want harhser restrictions but then just meet up with people anyway

[zahidf]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

When do people think social distancing in pubs, clubs and gigs will end?

May officially. March a majority of people wont be following the lockdown rules i reckon, if not sooner

 

( and i mean this in most the west BTW, not just the UK)

Edited December 17, 2020 by zahidf

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

I hate to say it and I know many won't agree ... and yes Ive no kids .... but at least Secondary .... workplaces like the first one essential ones only the rest wfh .... not keen on exercise limits outdoors .... but that is what some countries have done along with curfews ... we haven't taken that approach .... the problem is that the more people are out and about the more people continue as they were ... you stand out more when you are out if not many others are ...

if they're going to close secondary schools again then surely they have to cancel GCSEs and make it teacher assessed, just too unfair on kids who don't have the same ability to do the online lessons as others.

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, zahidf said:

Police dont want to enforce the current lockdown. Good luck getting them to enforce harsher ones.

You need to take the population with you. People say they want harhser restrictions but then just meet up with people anyway

I agree and It needs to be sold .... as in previous post its far easier to enforce if minimal people are out and about , no way they could enforce the last one for example .. that was just a mess from day 1 .... 

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Police dont want to enforce the current lockdown. Good luck getting them to enforce harsher ones.

You need to take the population with you. People say they want harhser restrictions but then just meet up with people anyway

I actually think a lot of people would comply...as long as they can see that vaccines are being rolled out and the end is nigh.

[steviewevie]

Psychology explains why Christmas with family is particularly risky in a pandemic

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/17/christmas-at-home-perfect-scenario-covid-pandemic-fatal

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

if they're going to close secondary schools again then surely they have to cancel GCSEs and make it teacher assessed, just too unfair on kids who don't have the same ability to do the online lessons as others.

absolutely .... think this is so unfair anyway ... some schools will be massively affected with the kids being off through positive tests amongst the bubbles ... but at the moment this isn't accounted for .... its just kind of accepted ...  and that will likely be the case more in deprived areas with higher rates of the virus 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, zahidf said:

May officially. March a majority of people wont be following the lockdown rules i reckon, if not sooner

 

( and i mean this in most the west BTW, not just the UK)

Based on no evidence at all that suggests after March people won’t follow the rules. It’s clear you are desperate for all the restrictions to end but I’m afraid you are expecting it too soon, you’ll end up being disappointed. Quite a few different people have shown you comments from various medics, scientists and leaders that show social distancing in some form will be here for a while but you are ignoring it. In fact there’s plenty of evidence that the majority of people are following the restrictions and will continue to do so because they realise why it’s place.

Edited December 17, 2020 by Ozanne

[steviewevie]

5 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

absolutely .... think this is so unfair anyway ... some schools will be massively affected with the kids being off through positive tests amongst the bubbles ... but at the moment this isn't accounted for .... its just kind of accepted ...  and that will likely be the case more in deprived areas with higher rates of the virus 

just seen this...

Staggered return for England's secondary schools next term

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-55348886