Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

My only hypothetical thought is that would any vaccines available privately be taking away one from someone who needs it and can’t afford it? I’ve no idea if that is even a thing that can happen!

If it's anything like the flu vaccine then no, they have separate stocks.

My company is encouraging us to get the flu jab this year and covering it as an expense.  Asked down at my village pharmacy about getting it done there, and all of their stock is reserved for allocated NHS recipients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Quark said:

If it's anything like the flu vaccine then no, they have separate stocks.

My company is encouraging us to get the flu jab this year and covering it as an expense.  Asked down at my village pharmacy about getting it done there, and all of their stock is reserved for allocated NHS recipients.

My partner's employer does something similar- he is not high risk but they pay for him to get it anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Quark said:

If it's anything like the flu vaccine then no, they have separate stocks.

My company is encouraging us to get the flu jab this year and covering it as an expense.  Asked down at my village pharmacy about getting it done there, and all of their stock is reserved for allocated NHS recipients.

Now you say that I’ve just remembered by company is saying they’d cover the flu jab expenses too. 
 

20 minutes ago, alanr said:

Most recent data shown is 22 Oct, the rest even older. I would prefer up to date info

Sorry for the short reply but go to fivethirtyeight.com that will show you up to date polling figures. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

My partner's employer does something similar- he is not high risk but they pay for him to get it anyway. 

 

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Now you say that I’ve just remembered by company is saying they’d cover the flu jab expenses too. 
 

As much as my company does genuinely try to look after its staff, you've also got to be thinking they're working out that £10 per employee or thereabouts to minimise the risk of further time off and the like after the year we've already had balances out againt the benefit. Makes sense really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

If there was some kind of vaccine passport that would buy you an exemption from the restrictions then I’d pay a fortune to get it. Possibly would be willing to pay a grand or more. But then I’m not sure as a society that we want to be going down a route where the haves can pay for a vaccine and free themselves from restrictions whereas the have nots have to stay in lockdown. It’s a tough call really. 

 

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

I wouldn't want to be part of a society where only the wealthy can get a vaccine...which is probably why it will happen.

Only thing saving us from this is the economic effects. Hopefully their need for us all to consume outweighs any ideological thoughts around a society like that. 

1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

Even without a vaccine Glastonbury will be going ahead next summer. As I’ve stated before a larger testing system will enable the festival to go ahead. So whilst a vaccine would be very welcome it’s not the deciding factor. I guess what I’m saying is even if all vaccines stall then festivals will go ahead next summer. 

Yeah that's where I am with it - outdoor (day) gigs are surely ok with testing because even if a few false negatives slip through, it'd take a reasonably unlucky chain of events for that person to transmit the virus at the event, if they're even at the stage of being able to do so. Almost definitely wouldn't be a super spreader event outdoors anyway 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Quark said:

 

As much as my company does genuinely try to look after its staff, you've also got to be thinking they're working out that £10 per employee or thereabouts to minimise the risk of further time off and the like after the year we've already had balances out againt the benefit. Makes sense really.

It’s also about costs, if it’s cost effective to care for staff then they will 😉

 

Warrington heading into tier 3 tonight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, alanr said:

Most recent data shown is 22 Oct, the rest even older. I would prefer up to date info

There won't be anything more up to date yet, the dates given are when the fieldwork was happening, the responses then go to the boffins for number crunching. YouGov's most recent poll was published today with fieldwork being 13-20th October. (It gives Trump a 5 point lead.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Bristol shooting up in it's case rate with 307 per 100,000 people now @eFestivals

BANES at 169 per 100,000

Wonder how long until we're put in to Tier 2? Hospitalisations look relatively stable currently however.

Is Bristol still the lowest tier then? Didn't realise that. (Am from Bris, live in London.) Am I correct in thinking that the thing that would stop me from being able to visit Bristol would be if either London or Bristol went tier three? Although if I do go back it will be for a funeral, anyone know if there is an exception for that? Ta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Homer said:

Is Bristol still the lowest tier then? Didn't realise that. (Am from Bris, live in London.) Am I correct in thinking that the thing that would stop me from being able to visit Bristol would be if either London or Bristol went tier three? Although if I do go back it will be for a funeral, anyone know if there is an exception for that? Ta.

I think you can attend but you mustn’t mix with any other household. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Bristol shooting up in it's case rate with 307 per 100,000 people now @eFestivals

BANES at 169 per 100,000

Wonder how long until we're put in to Tier 2? Hospitalisations look relatively stable currently however.

I dotn get how Bristol has managed to avoid it so far. B&NES are assuming they'll be in Tier 2 shortly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, crazyfool1 said:

absolutely ... we all want the same thing ultimately ... just we all have different thoughts on the way it should be achieved ... I dont think actually my thoughts on it are necessarily right .... we actually dont really know whats right and it might be sometime long away that we get some idea .... would love a cider with all of you in June :) 

Post of the month. We could all do with adopting this attitude instead of all the petty bickering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeyT said:

Bristol shooting up in it's case rate with 307 per 100,000 people now @eFestivals

BANES at 169 per 100,000

Wonder how long until we're put in to Tier 2? Hospitalisations look relatively stable currently however.

Yet another example of what myself and others have said on here, regarding the utter idiocy of sending all these students across the country to university. Bristol's trend clearly a couple weeks behind Manchester, Liverpool etc, as when I was there studying, term time always started slightly later than at other unis, which explains the delay. I just cannot understand why they have encouraged this, it was always bound to happen and frankly benefits nobody in society other than the universities themselves - the students get a rubbish uni experience, either locked up in halls or not being able to socialise properly, while paying £9000 plus accommodation costs for the privilege, while the rest of society has to put up with far greater restrictions. Quite why this was encouraged is beyond me. I believe strongly that schools should be back, but university should be treated differently, when contact time for a lot of courses is only a few hours a week which can easily be done online from home, unlike schools where you get teacher contact 6 hours a day.

 

Clearly it all came down to the government wanting the universities to get their accommodation revenue, but given the economical impact this has had on many other businesses just shows how short-sighted this government is and I imagine the impact on the economy as a whole will be greater with us restricting/closing down other sectors, than if we'd not let students go to university. 

 

All of this is clearly before we even start to look at the impact on public health and on number of deaths, as a result of the increase in viral spread. Madness!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, tigger123 said:

Clearly it all came down to the government wanting the universities to get their accommodation revenue,

Most of the accomodation is run by private providers, not universities themselves. 

The MPs probably have shares in the private providers.

It tends to be your Russel group universities that run it themselves, they're only about 10% of the sector though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...