Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

The only outlier I can see in this whole situation is Germany. Nobody else comes out of this smelling of roses having handled it significantly better than anyone else.

we had more time than France, Italy and Spain to prepare...we saw it was coming.  I think we'll come out of this pretty badly in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it will be phased, keeping an eye on case numbers to see what starts to tip it into unmanageable territory.

Watchng Andrew Marr listening to the person taking about the vaccine, it’s clear that this is going to essentially be like another flu that we live with. It’s going to kill people every year just like flu, but before long we’ll get used to it and live alongside it just like flu.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

we had more time than France, Italy and Spain to prepare...we saw it was coming.  I think we'll come out of this pretty badly in the end.

You talk like this is a one time hit? This virus isn’t going anywhere, possibly not even with a vaccine. As long as our health service isn’t overwhelmed then when all is said and done, what difference does it make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Yeah it will be phased, keeping an eye on case numbers to see what starts to tip it into unmanageable territory.

Watchng Andrew Marr listening to the person taking about the vaccine, it’s clear that this is going to essentially be like another flu that we live with. It’s going to kill people every year just like flu, but before long we’ll get used to it and live alongside it just like flu.

if that's the case then we're going to have to spend a lot more on health care...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

You talk like this is a one time hit? This virus isn’t going anywhere, possibly not even with a vaccine. As long as our health service isn’t overwhelmed then when all is said and done, what difference does it make?

I guess the fact that a lot of people are dying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

When do people on here think we'll exit lockdown?

I work in central London and have to get the Central Line every day, my dad part of the 1.5 million who are vulnerable. I think my work might be seeing that the working from home is sustainable and will potentially just say stay at home until it’s ‘safe.’ It’s the ‘safe’ bit that worries me rather than when we exit lockdown as I think that could be a lot later this year. I also have an inkling that It will be around this ‘safe’ marker (‘safe’ used loosely) that pubs/clubs/restaurants will be allowed to open back up (with social distancing regulations etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, shoptildrop said:

The Times going for the jugular (this is the is the link so can read without the paywall) - it's pretty damning and can see Daily Fail already has stories posted to try and counter-balance with the traffic light exit plan and Bojo taking back control

https://archive.is/20200418182037/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-38-days-when-britain-sleepwalked-into-disaster-hq3b9tlgh

Notice though that what should have been the main front page story, was instead relegated to second place in favour of the BS "exit strategy" (the one that seems to think everyone will frequent shops, public transportation, cinema's, pubs, restaurants, etc once they're reopened, in sufficient numbers to avoid mass bankruptcy). So really, the press (and especially the bbc) are still very much on a softly, softly style of criticism, whereby they do one critical story but then smother it in a load of soft stories.

Another thing to consider is that the government are now subsidising the print media:

 

Quote

 

The Daily Mail is famous for its big, bold front pages, which help it shift more than a million copies each day in the UK on average.

Barely a day goes by without the paper’s splash hitting the sweet spot of its readers’ interests; things that do or don’t give you cancer, rumours about the Royal family, stridently pro-Conservative political coverage, and so on.

But on Friday, for the first time in its history, the Mail’s readers saw something that readers of other British newspapers have been seeing for years — a wraparound advert and a message saying “your regular paper is inside”.

The “wrap” — industry jargon for advertising that goes all the way round the paper — was paid for by the government. The message was simple: “Stay At Home”.

All other regional and national papers in the UK carried this “wrap” on Friday, which marks the beginning of a three-month “advertising partnership between the government and the industry”, according to Press Gazette.

The government considers the need to spread the “‘stay at home”’ message to be vital.

But at the same time, newspapers really need the cash.

Although there is huge demand for news at the moment, the Coronavirus pandemic has left the media suddenly facing drastic financial challenges at a time when falling ad revenue and declining print circulation were already hitting the industry hard.

The crisis has caused sales to dip further, while advertising revenue has taken a brutal hit. No outlet — not even the commercially successful Daily Mail — has been spared.

News UK, which is the parent company of the Times, Sunday Times and Sun, also took the wrap. “The business is doing everything it can to mitigate the impact. We are in constant conversation with our advertisers,” said an internal email sent on Friday by Chris Longcroft, the company's chief financial officer.

“We are pleased to have secured significant government advertising spend during this period, such as the cover wraps of The Times and The Sun today.”

 

 

https://www.buzzfeed.com/joeydurso/coronavirus-uk-media-industry

 

So basically the government fund the BBC (and have them under threat of mass cut backs) and are subsidising the newspapers to stop them going bust. No conflict of interest there then! So at best there will be one or two critical stories, but the vast majority will just focus on stuff like 'our NHS heroes' and 'Carrie- I feared I would never see Boris again!' and prep to get the public to support the ending of the lockdown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PolygonWindow said:

I work in central London and have to get the Central Line every day, my dad part of the 1.5 million who are vulnerable. I think my work might be seeing that the working from home is sustainable and will potentially just say stay at home until it’s ‘safe.’ It’s the ‘safe’ bit that worries me rather than when we exit lockdown as I think that could be a lot later this year. I also have an inkling that It will be around this ‘safe’ marker (‘safe’ used loosely) that pubs/clubs/restaurants will be allowed to open back up (with social distancing regulations etc)

A friend and of mine works at a property investment company with about 15-20 staff. They’ve decided to just get rid of their office and all work from home, they’ve functioned just fine over the past few weeks so much so they now see the rent they’ve been spending as totally unnecessary. Obviously this isn’t going to happen completely wholesale, but a lot of companies are likely to suddenly think along these lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a scenario like in Germany or S Korea? If UK had acted earlier would there be less deaths? If UK had continued to test people with symptoms when moved from contain to delay would there be less deaths? If health workers had protective equipment would there be less deaths? If they had done something about elderly care homes in advance would there be less deaths? Anyway, who cares, herd immunity...survival of the fittest...it is what it is,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, crazyfool1 said:

When do the opposition get the free reign to start tearing the government to shreds  without looking like they are spliting this all together thing ? It’s a tough balancing act ... 

They won't- BBC News seems to think it's job is to protect the government and maintain the country's morale, and the print press (as well as being subsidised by the government) are so concerned about going bust, they'll start doing a heavy push for the ending of the lockdown pretty soon (see todays front pages). Everyone blasted Corbyn, but Starmer is about to find out it's nearly impossible to get any traction vs the government when the BBC and papers refuse to go along with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Andrew marr defending the govt by saying 'hindsight is easy'.

That's the BBC News editorial line at the moment- defend the government. It's utter bollocks, but if you watch all their coverage you can clearly see them maintaining this line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

In a scenario like in Germany or S Korea? If UK had acted earlier would there be less deaths? If UK had continued to test people with symptoms when moved from contain to delay would there be less deaths? If health workers had protective equipment would there be less deaths? If they had done something about elderly care homes in advance would there be less deaths? Anyway, who cares, herd immunity...survival of the fittest...it is what it is,.

I personally think the vast majority of deaths that have happened already will have happened anyway between now and the vaccine being developed/and or herd immunity. And that’s on the basis that kills it off, and not a scenario where it behaves like flu and it never goes away anyway, we just learn to live with it. As humans we don’t like to talk about death or consider our own mortality, it’s particularly unpalatable to see 1000 people a dying from a virus, but somehow more palatable to see a tenth of that figure every day for a much longer period, like pneumonia does on its own every day anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

When do people on here think we'll exit lockdown?

I think the government think they have more control over this than they do- I think they'll try to open things up, but I think people (or at least those that can afford to) will simply choose to continue to stay at home.

Plus, what happens when things are opened up and we get another surge? Do we start lockdown again or do we do what the government always wanted to do and just let it run wild?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I personally think the vast majority of deaths that have happened already will have happened anyway between now and the vaccine being developed/and or herd immunity. And that’s on the basis that kills it off, and not a scenario where it behaves like flu and it never goes away anyway, we just learn to live with it. As humans we don’t like to talk about death or consider our own mortality, it’s particularly unpalatable to see 1000 people a dying from a virus, but somehow more palatable to see a tenth of that figure every day for a much longer period, like pneumonia does on its own every day anyway.

Not sure how well they'll sell that argument if UK ends up with more deaths from this than anyone else in europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

A friend and of mine works at a property investment company with about 15-20 staff. They’ve decided to just get rid of their office and all work from home, they’ve functioned just fine over the past few weeks so much so they now see the rent they’ve been spending as totally unnecessary. Obviously this isn’t going to happen completely wholesale, but a lot of companies are likely to suddenly think along these lines.

That’s great if people have space to work from home and a decent internet connection. Our work have said that they are reviewing the work from home policy, and are looking at running the business more flexibly, but we will still have offices. 
 

my new job is work from home so this has been good practice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Not sure how well they'll sell that argument if UK ends up with more deaths from this than anyone else in europe.

We probably will end up with more outright deaths as we’ve got a large population on a small island. Deaths per million population is the better overall indicator. Spain is still nearly double us on that marker, despite acting sooner. 

 

B5A82FC5-0316-4D3F-9EBD-1525D7F89879.png

Edited by Deaf Nobby Burton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

We probably will end up with more outright deaths as we’ve got a large population on a small island. Deaths per million population is the better overall indicator. Spain is still over double us on that marker, despite acting sooner. 

 

B5A82FC5-0316-4D3F-9EBD-1525D7F89879.png

still doesn't look good when looking back...especially with all the stuff that's starting t come out, and I'm sure there will be plenty more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Yeah it will be phased, keeping an eye on case numbers to see what starts to tip it into unmanageable territory.

Watchng Andrew Marr listening to the person taking about the vaccine, it’s clear that this is going to essentially be like another flu that we live with. It’s going to kill people every year just like flu, but before long we’ll get used to it and live alongside it just like flu.

It's not like flu, because the vast majority (basically over 90% of the population) don't have any immunity to it, therefore it's infection rate and prevalence is much much higher. To get to the point of it being 'just like flu' either we need a vaccine, or sufficient numbers have to get infected (60-80% of the population), meaning hundreds of thousands would die. It only becomes just like another flu after that.

Edited by Mr.Tease
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr.Tease said:

It's not like flu, because the vast majority (basically over 90% of the population) don't have any immunity to it, therefore it's infection rate and prevalence is much much higher. To get to the point of it being 'just like flu' either we need a vaccine, or sufficient numbers have to get infected (60-80% of the population), meaning hundreds of thousands would die

I said going to be like flu, I’m not talking about it’s current state, which is essentially what the person on Andrew Marr was saying. They seemed to think we’d only get immunity for a couple of years, hence the comparison to flu, because once we’ve got a vaccine we’ll need update it every year (like flu) and people will need regular boosters (like flu)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I said going to be like flu, I’m not talking about it’s current state, which is essentially what the person on Andrew Marr was saying. They seemed to think we’d only get immunity for a couple of years, hence the comparison to flu, because once we’ve got a vaccine we’ll need update it every year (like flu) and people will need regular boosters (like flu)

I realised that and added an extra sentence at the same time as you were typing this😉

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...