When will this shit end?

[Rex2]

If restrictions continue to be in place once everyone has been offered a vaccine I'll be more inclined to believe lunatics who said that the whole thing is a nefarious scheme to increase government control over the population

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, zero000 said:

I notice that the article mentions more ministerial control over the NHS with this reform however, which leaves me suspicious about their wider motives. Particularly given the Britannia Unchained shite plenty of the cabinet have spouted about privatisation of the NHS. 

I'm actually pleased if there's going to be more govt control. It means the govt are taking responsibility for it.

The reforms from around a decade ago were all about the govt distancing themselves from the running of the NHS, and enabled them to badmouth the NHS for failings that were the result of govt policy (funding, mostly).

[Ozanne]

10 minutes ago, Rex2 said:

If restrictions continue to be in place once everyone has been offered a vaccine I'll be more inclined to believe lunatics who said that the whole thing is a nefarious scheme to increase government control over the population

That doesn’t fit with Johnson’s libertarian views though. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

That doesn’t fit with Johnson’s libertarian views though. 

I’m a libertarian like Boris but I don’t think you need to be a freedom lover to suggest that restrictions should go once EVERYONE has been offered a vaccine. 

[steviewevie]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

upvotes/downvotes turned off, because some people aren't able to handle people who disagree with them.

if only I could upvote this post.

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

if only I could upvote this post.

I’m all about the upvotes ... wish we could just have those ... fuck the conflict ... we don’t need that shit at the mo 

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, Rex2 said:

If restrictions continue to be in place once everyone has been offered a vaccine I'll be more inclined to believe lunatics who said that the whole thing is a nefarious scheme to increase government control over the population

depends what you mean by restrictions.

It's perfectly understandable that the govt/scientists/NHS are worried about next winter, and the impact a winter virus like covid might have on the NHS next winter even after vaccinations. We don't want to find ourselves in the same place as now, again.

So there's going to be some caution around that, and the most obvious restrictions to remain (if they choose to keep them) would be social distancing and masks indoors. I can see them being in place next winter even if they're not in place during the summer.

Before next winter, I'm keeping my fingers crossed that they'll use this summer to at least try and get some data on what happens with bigger outdoor not-social-distanced crowds, because from what we know so far it seems like the risks are low in the scheme of things.

[steviewevie]

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm actually pleased if there's going to be more govt control. It means the govt are taking responsibility for it.

The reforms from around a decade ago were all about the govt distancing themselves from the running of the NHS, and enabled them to badmouth the NHS for failings that were the result of govt policy (funding, mostly).

So, with NHS safe in tory hands...what have labour got? welfare? Social care? pro immigration? pro EU?!

[steviewevie]

Can't we have likes but lose the upvote/downvote thing? I like likes.

[Ozanne]

13 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm actually pleased if there's going to be more govt control. It means the govt are taking responsibility for it.

The reforms from around a decade ago were all about the govt distancing themselves from the running of the NHS, and enabled them to badmouth the NHS for failings that were the result of govt policy (funding, mostly).

I might have miss-understood so please correct me if I have. Could giving Ministers more direct power over the NHS mean that they can bring in more privatisation without Parliament oversight as they have that control? Similar to emergency powers being used against democracy?

[eFestivals]

Just now, steviewevie said:

So, with NHS safe in tory hands...what have labour got? welfare? Social care? pro immigration? pro EU?!

Labour has a line they've been using for (at least) 40 years about how the tories want to destroy the NHS.

One day they might wise up to the fact that that line harms their electoral chances and doesn't enhance them. Cos while we can see the tories for what they are, after 40 years the NHS is still there and still much the same. 

Labour need to use a line something like "... and build on the successes of the NHS".

Welfare is never much of a vote winner, as it's asking most of the population to vote themselves poorer. 

Social care? Perhaps. But Spaffer has his own plan, so he's claimed.

Pro immigration and pro EU won't sell as anything high on their priorities. People want policies to be to their/the country's benefit, while those will be generally viewed as favouring others before the UK.

Housing. Building a better NHS. Tackling wage inequality. 

Vote me! 😛 

[DeanoL]

10 hours ago, Chapple12345 said:

I apologise for how ignorant this sounds but I can't see many reasons as to why this summer will suddenly get worse then last summer with the help of vaccines, a huge chunk of the population will have been vaccinated by then so we should be approaching some better form of normality by that time, again putting models out like that when even the scientists remain uncertain is only going to cause more confusion for people 

Last summer led to last Autumn and winter though which were a disaster.

The way I see it the vaccine isn’t sterilising so there needs to be some control of how it spreads, if nothing is in place you swiftly reach a point where everyone who can catch it, will catch it. Those who can’t have the vaccine, those who won’t have the vaccine, and kids. And that will probably be okay, but what if in the course of doing that it mutates into something that is actually deadly to kids? Or can evade one brand of the vaccine? At that point, there’s nothing you can do. You let it circulate, it’s everywhere. Those people are all dead.

By keeping some restrictions, you can monitor, check for mutations, and then employ further measures if needed. It won’t be too late.

Opening everything up and going straight back to normal normal might well work and be fine. But it’s a huge risk with potentially dire consequences.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

upvotes/downvotes turned off, because some people aren't able to handle people who disagree with them.

This makes me very happy.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Labour has a line they've been using for (at least) 40 years about how the tories want to destroy the NHS.

One day they might wise up to the fact that that line harms their electoral chances and doesn't enhance them. Cos while we can see the tories for what they are, after 40 years the NHS is still there and still much the same. 

Labour need to use a line something like "... and build on the successes of the NHS".

Welfare is never much of a vote winner, as it's asking most of the population to vote themselves poorer. 

Social care? Perhaps. But Spaffer has his own plan, so he's claimed.

Pro immigration and pro EU won't sell as anything high on their priorities. People want policies to be to their/the country's benefit, while those will be generally viewed as favouring others before the UK.

Housing. Building a better NHS. Tackling wage inequality. 

Vote me! 😛 

Starmer will be going for being more competent and basically things going back to normal? Boring life again.

Worked for Biden against trump. (Though of course starmer ain't no Biden, and Borisbisnt quite as crazy as trump)

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Labour has a line they've been using for (at least) 40 years about how the tories want to destroy the NHS.

One day they might wise up to the fact that that line harms their electoral chances and doesn't enhance them. Cos while we can see the tories for what they are, after 40 years the NHS is still there and still much the same. 

Labour need to use a line something like "... and build on the successes of the NHS".

Welfare is never much of a vote winner, as it's asking most of the population to vote themselves poorer. 

Social care? Perhaps. But Spaffer has his own plan, so he's claimed.

Pro immigration and pro EU won't sell as anything high on their priorities. People want policies to be to their/the country's benefit, while those will be generally viewed as favouring others before the UK.

Housing. Building a better NHS. Tackling wage inequality. 

Vote me! 😛 

yeah...this pandemic has definitely shown how we need a well funded NHS, and also how unequal society is.

[zahidf]

2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Last summer led to last Autumn and winter though which were a disaster.

The way I see it the vaccine isn’t sterilising so there needs to be some control of how it spreads, if nothing is in place you swiftly reach a point where everyone who can catch it, will catch it. Those who can’t have the vaccine, those who won’t have the vaccine, and kids. And that will probably be okay, but what if in the course of doing that it mutates into something that is actually deadly to kids? Or can evade one brand of the vaccine? At that point, there’s nothing you can do. You let it circulate, it’s everywhere. Those people are all dead.

By keeping some restrictions, you can monitor, check for mutations, and then employ further measures if needed. It won’t be too late.

Opening everything up and going straight back to normal normal might well work and be fine. But it’s a huge risk with potentially dire consequences.

This makes me very happy.

There was a study which said AZ cuts spread though (around 70% or so?) this week

[Crazyfool01]

5 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

This makes me very happy

Yep it’s usefull not being able to identify trolls for the people who join read the forum sporadically 

[steviewevie]

Covid Calendar.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/06/when-can-britain-reopen-this-spring-summer-and-autumns-covid-calendar

[stuartbert two hats]

6 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Last summer led to last Autumn and winter though which were a disaster.

The way I see it the vaccine isn’t sterilising so there needs to be some control of how it spreads, if nothing is in place you swiftly reach a point where everyone who can catch it, will catch it. Those who can’t have the vaccine, those who won’t have the vaccine, and kids. And that will probably be okay, but what if in the course of doing that it mutates into something that is actually deadly to kids? Or can evade one brand of the vaccine? At that point, there’s nothing you can do. You let it circulate, it’s everywhere. Those people are all dead.

By keeping some restrictions, you can monitor, check for mutations, and then employ further measures if needed. It won’t be too late.

Opening everything up and going straight back to normal normal might well work and be fine. But it’s a huge risk with potentially dire consequences.

This makes me very happy.

There is increasing evidence that the vaccines do reduce the spread though.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I might have miss-understood so please correct me if I have. Could giving Ministers more direct power over the NHS mean that they can bring in more privatisation without Parliament oversight as they have that control?

I presume not. At least, not easily or quietly.

To end the current NHS obligation to offer contracts will require a change in the law (cos it's written into the existing law). So the new law will show what powers the minister has, and if its simply going to transfer the same bad thing to a different place (while doing away with the bad thing is supposedly the good thing with the change) then that's going to cause things to kick off.

I really hate to say it, but I'm inclined to think intentions here might actually be good. Spaffer is smart enough to know how popular the NHS is - he makes a point of lauding it at the news conferences - and how the public are against contracting services out.

Launching an attack on the NHS when it's just won the war would seem the most politically stupid thing possible. And the opposite is also true, that doing what the public want with the NHS will be the smartest political thing possible. And Spaffer loves to be loved.

And putting it all in the hands of a minister for a wholesale sell-off instead of the piecemeal sell-off that's happened up till now just seems too out there, at least in the short-term. I guess the tories might be thinking ten years down the line.

Personally I've thought for a long time that although plenty of tories would love to big-time mess with the NHS, they've realised that it would be politically dumb. Even most tories love the NHS.

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Starmer will be going for being more competent and basically things going back to normal? Boring life again.

yeah, boring stuff like minimum wage, surestart, that everyone thought was a waste of time. 😛 

[ModernMan]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

upvotes/downvotes turned off, because some people aren't able to handle people who disagree with them.

Fantastic. 

[eFestivals]

16 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

This makes me very happy.

Your happiness isn't going to last. 

This place is not for any clique or for nodding along.

[ShakeyCrash]

1 hour ago, stuartbert two hats said:

But, but, but, I said something mean about anti-vaxxers and had been rewarded handsomely according to the notifications! 😆😆😆

It was my last upvote, and i wouldn’t change it for the world

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, ShakeyCrash said:

It was my last upvote, and i wouldn’t change it for the world

Kinda like a last rolo 

[parsonjack]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Your happiness isn't going to last. 

This place is not for any clique or for nodding along.

You are Jackie Weaver and I claim my prize.