Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Coronavirus (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 848 of 1255 < 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 >

Topic Locked

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.05pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays I'm obviously way out of sync with the main consensus as I disagree with the whole approach. I don't think it's ok to lock down the economically viable....destroy small businesses for the benefit of the large....This is the only time locking up healthy people has been done in history. It's not only wrong economically, it's wrong on a civil liberties front...the problem is that now the line has been breached it becomes acceptable. I'm in the 'at risk' category however I can't accept the reasoning where essentially the future of the young are sacrificed for tiny percentage gains for those in the winter of their lives...whose summers are behind them. The motivations of society are upside down.....what was it that Whitney Houson sang?....'I believe that children are our future'.....errrr. This was never the black death....I consider this all madness and when the economic pain comes in none of the normies have a leg to stand on. Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 3.38pm) Yep – and that's where we differ – it's not like the UK strategy has been that different to most other countries. Degrees of severity yes, but seeing as we are an international hub it's different for us, although as one poster has already said, we should have shut the lot down for two months and gone from there. Short, sharp and leaves more room for less severe, localised measures rather than trying to implement those when it's already rife across the whole country. If the UK was the only country acting like this then I'd side with your viewpoint of lock up the elderly etc. and carry on as normal. But I just don't see how that approach was ever viable. Maybe other countries tried this? But I've not read about it being a success if they did. As mentioned for me the penalty on the youf, and anyone else negatively affected is just an unavoidable outcome of the situation. As to the scale of those outcomes, sure, that can be debated. But they're unavoidable IMO Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.05pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

I'm obviously way out of sync with the main consensus as I disagree with the whole approach.

I don't think it's ok to lock down the economically viable....destroy small businesses for the benefit of the large....This is the only time locking up healthy people has been done in history.

It's not only wrong economically, it's wrong on a civil liberties front...the problem is that now the line has been breached it becomes acceptable.

I'm in the 'at risk' category however I can't accept the reasoning where essentially the future of the young are sacrificed for tiny percentage gains for those in the winter of their lives...whose summers are behind them.

The motivations of society are upside down.....what was it that Whitney Houson sang?....'I believe that children are our future'.....errrr.

This was never the black death....I consider this all madness and when the economic pain comes in none of the normies have a leg to stand on.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 3.38pm)

Yep – and that's where we differ – it's not like the UK strategy has been that different to most other countries. Degrees of severity yes, but seeing as we are an international hub it's different for us, although as one poster has already said, we should have shut the lot down for two months and gone from there. Short, sharp and leaves more room for less severe, localised measures rather than trying to implement those when it's already rife across the whole country.

If the UK was the only country acting like this then I'd side with your viewpoint of lock up the elderly etc. and carry on as normal. But I just don't see how that approach was ever viable. Maybe other countries tried this? But I've not read about it being a success if they did.

As mentioned for me the penalty on the youf, and anyone else negatively affected is just an unavoidable outcome of the situation. As to the scale of those outcomes, sure, that can be debated. But they're unavoidable IMO

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.07pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Some might comply but more and more will choose not to, from all age groups, including previously vulnerable. The ‘new variant’ headlines booming on bbc news won’t stop people. Until end of 2022? Dream on. People are not going to comply for 33 months in total. Edited by Rudi Hedman (19 Feb 2021 3.00pm) I don't agree. So long as things are wound back to normal or as close to it as possible during periods of low cases, eg. summer this year, then as and when reverting back to gathering limits, 1m distancing, masks eg. winter next year, maybe the year after... I don't see how that's an issue or suppressive enough to cause hysteria. You're talking as though I mean 33 months of lockdown. Edited by SW19 CPFC (19 Feb 2021 4.17pm) Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.07pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Some might comply but more and more will choose not to, from all age groups, including previously vulnerable. The ‘new variant’ headlines booming on bbc news won’t stop people. Until end of 2022? Dream on. People are not going to comply for 33 months in total.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (19 Feb 2021 3.00pm)

I don't agree. So long as things are wound back to normal or as close to it as possible during periods of low cases, eg. summer this year, then as and when reverting back to gathering limits, 1m distancing, masks eg. winter next year, maybe the year after... I don't see how that's an issue or suppressive enough to cause hysteria.

You're talking as though I mean 33 months of lockdown.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (19 Feb 2021 4.17pm)

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.16pm
Originally posted by Willo For avoidance of doubt, I have been an avid reader of the 'Daily Mail' for many,many years but this is not the sole source of my news information. You stated "MEDIA expectancy" but it was the mutterings of those in the Downing Street briefings which set an expectancy amongst the masses. I have my limitations of course and have faults but I would not list "Naivete' as amongst them.Those who have perused my musings on HOL would attest that perhaps I am not blessed with being overly optimistic and I have not been a chap who has engaged in over optimism in relation to the lifting of restrictions.Last year I did inform my dear wife to forget any foreign holidays until 2021! I like to believe that my experience of life has injected a significant dose of 'Realism' into me so I am in agreement with you when you stated that realism is what is required. Finally I understand the need for "Caveated announcements", however in the way they are presented they just add to the mood of despair and pessimism many are experiencing. Edited by Willo (19 Feb 2021 2.28pm) ha. To be clear I'm not specifically saying you only use the mail as your one source of information. That is clearly not the case (however as part of a balanced intake of 'news' it's a must read even if you don't agree with its premise) I'm also not saying you're naive, the post is contextual related to all too common statements of 'why hasn't this ended yet' and 'I thought it was going to be done in a few months'. There are plenty who were and still are inexplicably in that camp. I'd also argue that the announcements have in fact got far more positive of late. So I don't buy into that. Further – by design they really must be tempered by a sense of caution. People act ahead of time and even the slightest hint of party poppers or champagne positivity will open the floodgates and everyone will blow the whole thing prematurely. As others have said, people are disregarding rules en masse as it is, best not to make it worse. Positivity is creeping back into the messaging, this thing won't be doom and gloom forever. Again, it's about realism and managing your own expectations based on precedent and basically understanding the situation. Doesn't help someone that's struggling to pay the bills, but it is what it is. Some people lose, some people win. That's life. Pandemics are not supposed to be jolly affairs. Edited by SW19 CPFC (19 Feb 2021 4.47pm) Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 19 Feb 21 4.16pm

Originally posted by Willo

For avoidance of doubt, I have been an avid reader of the 'Daily Mail' for many,many years but this is not the sole source of my news information.
You stated "MEDIA expectancy" but it was the mutterings of those in the Downing Street briefings which set an expectancy amongst the masses.

I have my limitations of course and have faults but I would not list "Naivete' as amongst them.Those who have perused my musings on HOL would attest that perhaps I am not blessed with being overly optimistic and I have not been a chap who has engaged in over optimism in relation to the lifting of restrictions.Last year I did inform my dear wife to forget any foreign holidays until 2021!

I like to believe that my experience of life has injected a significant dose of 'Realism' into me so I am in agreement with you when you stated that realism is what is required.

Finally I understand the need for "Caveated announcements", however in the way they are presented they just add to the mood of despair and pessimism many are experiencing.

Edited by Willo (19 Feb 2021 2.28pm)

ha. To be clear I'm not specifically saying you only use the mail as your one source of information. That is clearly not the case (however as part of a balanced intake of 'news' it's a must read even if you don't agree with its premise)

I'm also not saying you're naive, the post is contextual related to all too common statements of 'why hasn't this ended yet' and 'I thought it was going to be done in a few months'. There are plenty who were and still are inexplicably in that camp.

I'd also argue that the announcements have in fact got far more positive of late. So I don't buy into that. Further – by design they really must be tempered by a sense of caution. People act ahead of time and even the slightest hint of party poppers or champagne positivity will open the floodgates and everyone will blow the whole thing prematurely.

As others have said, people are disregarding rules en masse as it is, best not to make it worse. Positivity is creeping back into the messaging, this thing won't be doom and gloom forever. Again, it's about realism and managing your own expectations based on precedent and basically understanding the situation. Doesn't help someone that's struggling to pay the bills, but it is what it is. Some people lose, some people win. That's life.

Pandemics are not supposed to be jolly affairs.

Edited by SW19 CPFC (19 Feb 2021 4.47pm)

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

Lombardinho London 19 Feb 21 6.31pm
I haven't spent much time on this thread over the last few months and there's a good reason for that. However, today I saw a piece that's on topic and I just had to share [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Lombardinho

London 19 Feb 21 6.31pm

I haven't spent much time on this thread over the last few months and there's a good reason for that.

However, today I saw a piece that's on topic and I just had to share

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops CR3 19 Feb 21 10.28pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman He’s not young enough for that kind of regular 4 day sexual activity. Hey, I’m certainly old enough to remember the song, although mid 50’s isn’t that old and the thought is still there, even if the reality doesn’t stand much of a chance of occurring.
Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops

CR3 19 Feb 21 10.28pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

He’s not young enough for that kind of regular 4 day sexual activity.

Hey, I’m certainly old enough to remember the song, although mid 50’s isn’t that old and the thought is still there, even if the reality doesn’t stand much of a chance of occurring.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 19 Feb 21 10.45pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays An 'emergence of a new variant'? We know that viruses are constantly evolving.....that's what they do. The 'new variant', was just another media device used to keep the masses scared and so support the continuation of policy. Hmm. The Kent version is now the dominant strain. How do you suppose that happened so quickly then? Analysis of the variant, known as B117, suggests it is up to 70 per cent more transmissible than the previous strain that was dominant in the UK.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 19 Feb 21 10.45pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

An 'emergence of a new variant'? We know that viruses are constantly evolving.....that's what they do.

The 'new variant', was just another media device used to keep the masses scared and so support the continuation of policy.

Hmm. The Kent version is now the dominant strain. How do you suppose that happened so quickly then?

Analysis of the variant, known as B117, suggests it is up to 70 per cent more transmissible than the previous strain that was dominant in the UK.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 19 Feb 21 11.18pm
Originally posted by Mapletree Hmm. The Kent version is now the dominant strain. How do you suppose that happened so quickly then? Analysis of the variant, known as B117, suggests it is up to 70 per cent more transmissible than the previous strain that was dominant in the UK. Do you know what the word 'variant' means? All the numbers you suggest are not factual but supposition, how accurate those numbers are isn't known. Also new transmissible variants were not reported in the mainstream press until they became convenient to do so......whereas it's more likely that they were around far earlier than they were reported. Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 11.19pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

19 Feb 21 11.18pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

Hmm. The Kent version is now the dominant strain. How do you suppose that happened so quickly then?

Analysis of the variant, known as B117, suggests it is up to 70 per cent more transmissible than the previous strain that was dominant in the UK.

Do you know what the word 'variant' means?

All the numbers you suggest are not factual but supposition, how accurate those numbers are isn't known.

Also new transmissible variants were not reported in the mainstream press until they became convenient to do so......whereas it's more likely that they were around far earlier than they were reported.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 11.19pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 19 Feb 21 11.27pm
Originally posted by SW19 CPFC Yep – and that's where we differ – it's not like the UK strategy has been that different to most other countries. Degrees of severity yes, but seeing as we are an international hub it's different for us, although as one poster has already said, we should have shut the lot down for two months and gone from there. Short, sharp and leaves more room for less severe, localised measures rather than trying to implement those when it's already rife across the whole country. If the UK was the only country acting like this then I'd side with your viewpoint of lock up the elderly etc. and carry on as normal. But I just don't see how that approach was ever viable. Maybe other countries tried this? But I've not read about it being a success if they did. As mentioned for me the penalty on the youf, and anyone else negatively affected is just an unavoidable outcome of the situation. As to the scale of those outcomes, sure, that can be debated. But they're unavoidable IMO This is why I rarely comment on this topic anymore. I differ so far from the mainstream consensus that it's like I'm talking another language. The actions that you regard as required I regard as unacceptable. Also your point about similar global responses isn't what I'd call an endorsement....just because the houses in your street are on fire that doesn't mean you should light a match to your own. I wager in time my opinion will gain far more traction. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

19 Feb 21 11.27pm

Originally posted by SW19 CPFC

This is why I rarely comment on this topic anymore.

I differ so far from the mainstream consensus that it's like I'm talking another language.

The actions that you regard as required I regard as unacceptable. Also your point about similar global responses isn't what I'd call an endorsement....just because the houses in your street are on fire that doesn't mean you should light a match to your own.

I wager in time my opinion will gain far more traction.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Feb 21 12.06am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Do you know what the word 'variant' means? All the numbers you suggest are not factual but supposition, how accurate those numbers are isn't known. Also new transmissible variants were not reported in the mainstream press until they became convenient to do so......whereas it's more likely that they were around far earlier than they were reported. Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 11.19pm) Yes I do. And? Supposition eh? Follow the links. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Feb 21 12.06am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Do you know what the word 'variant' means?

All the numbers you suggest are not factual but supposition, how accurate those numbers are isn't known.

Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Feb 2021 11.19pm)

Yes I do. And?

Supposition eh? Follow the links.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Feb 21 12.14am
Originally posted by Mapletree Yes I do. And? Supposition eh? Follow the links. [Link] Your response adds nothing to what I posted, same with the link. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Feb 21 12.14am

Originally posted by Mapletree

Yes I do. And?

Supposition eh? Follow the links.

[Link]

Your response adds nothing to what I posted, same with the link.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Feb 21 12.23am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Your response adds nothing to what I posted, same with the link. I see you are confused between the word supposition and the word fact Easy mistake to make. [Link] Download the paper from Imperial. B1.1.7 is 30 to 50 % more transmissible
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Feb 21 12.23am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Your response adds nothing to what I posted, same with the link.

I see you are confused between the word supposition and the word fact

Easy mistake to make.

[Link]

Download the paper from Imperial. B1.1.7 is 30 to 50 % more transmissible

Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC Addiscombe West 20 Feb 21 12.25am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays This is why I rarely comment on this topic anymore. I differ so far from the mainstream consensus that it's like I'm talking another language. The actions that you regard as required I regard as unacceptable. Also your point about similar global responses isn't what I'd call an endorsement....just because the houses in your street are on fire that doesn't mean you should light a match to your own. I wager in time my opinion will gain far more traction. On some things. As for endorsement... I'm not sure. If your approach was so obviously viable then someone would have taken a punt on it, tried it and succeeded. It's easy to argue for alternatives nearly a year after the fact, harder to put them into practice right at the beginning with so much unknown and so much at stake. Your opinion may or may not gain traction but only due to hindsight. A critical decision had to be taken in March 2020 in realtime, not with the luxury of time. Ultimately it could just have been left to play out but no one was advocating for that at the time – the decision makers are not scientists – do you really think it's realistic to suggest they would have asked for advice then completely ignored it based on nothing other than personal opinion? I find that view odd, certainly illogical and entirely unscientific. Also, it depends if the fire in question is in fact needed to prevent the rest of the house from burning down. Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.
Alert a moderator to this post

SW19 CPFC

Addiscombe West 20 Feb 21 12.25am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

This is why I rarely comment on this topic anymore.

I differ so far from the mainstream consensus that it's like I'm talking another language.

I wager in time my opinion will gain far more traction.

On some things.

As for endorsement... I'm not sure. If your approach was so obviously viable then someone would have taken a punt on it, tried it and succeeded.

It's easy to argue for alternatives nearly a year after the fact, harder to put them into practice right at the beginning with so much unknown and so much at stake.

Your opinion may or may not gain traction but only due to hindsight. A critical decision had to be taken in March 2020 in realtime, not with the luxury of time.

Ultimately it could just have been left to play out but no one was advocating for that at the time – the decision makers are not scientists – do you really think it's realistic to suggest they would have asked for advice then completely ignored it based on nothing other than personal opinion? I find that view odd, certainly illogical and entirely unscientific.

Also, it depends if the fire in question is in fact needed to prevent the rest of the house from burning down.

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 848 of 1255 < 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Coronavirus (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors