Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[rulefan]

I was under the impression that those who got the letter were told to stay at home and not leave the house for any reason with people picking up their shopping, medication the lot. I am not sure that it was a full house arrest type thing but I believe it was worded that if you left home there was a strong chance you could die. I think that they are a couple of steps behind the general population that they can now go outside and meet with one person.

It was rather more nuanced. There was a strong chance you would die if you became infected.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I’d point to the excess deaths figures and beg to differ. The vast majority of governments around the world have done better, some of them massively so.

I appreciate the need to rally round and help the country get out of this mess but let’s not do so at the cost of ignoring the unpleasant truth of how we got here.

But until we have the true figure I’ll keep my powder dry.

I’m Labour thru and thru, but I’m yet to see concrete evidence that can damn them at this stage, nothing to do with unpleasant truth.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

You can't really communicate in advance about the decisions you will be making in a clear way unless you have a plan and a comms strategy around it. Of course there has to be some significant element of reaction to events around the pandemic, but it seems that some of the decision making we are seeing is in response to the actions of a somewhat confused UK population and political/economic imperatives.

Apparently we now (as of yesterday?) have the capacity to test 200,000 a day (which is a very good thing - though not sure how many tests are actually being carried out). That's very handy given it happens to meet what Johnson said would happen. But unfortunately - given the previous target on testing, Contact Tracing and the Dominishambles - I have reached the point that I frankly don't believe much of what I am hearing from the mouths of Johnson and the Quad. I found it telling that the Sunday Times reported yesterday that Vallance and Whiitey declined to be part of the briefing when Johnson 'cleared' Cummings of any wrong-doing.

BTW - before any attack me for being 'disrespectful' in referring to key ministers as 'the Quad'...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/04/18/boris-johnson-starts-take-back-control/

Don't believe we have a confused population at all. We have a majority (just?) who are behaving responsibly and understand the situation, and then we have the numpties who are saying ," Sod it, I'll do what I want. The weather's great, etc etc."
The latter make the headlines,which normally suggests that they are not too much to worry about, but I don't find that a comfort; because there are too many of them behaving selfishly enough to threaten the R rate.
GB72 made a reasonable point in post 3312- It could be that the government saw the steam coming from out the kettle spout.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Don't believe we have a confused population at all. We have a majority (just?) who are behaving responsibly and understand the situation, and then we have the numpties who are saying ," Sod it, I'll do what I want. The weather's great, etc etc."
The latter make the headlines,which normally suggests that they are not too much to worry about, but I don't find that a comfort; because there are too many of them behaving selfishly enough to threaten the R rate.
GB72 made a reasonable point in post 3312- It could be that the government saw the steam coming from out the kettle spout.

I could not tell you the new rules other than at a guess. I believe many are in the same position. We continue to stick pretty solidly to the rules as they were at the outset.

My question in respect of the elderly and vulnerable was around the idea that over 70s and vulnerable were subject to the same guidance - stay at home and be shielded from the virus for 12 weeks. If I am wrong then I didn't understand the difference.

Now I hear that one or both of the over 70s and most vulnerable groups are 'allowed' to leave their home. By saying they are 'allowed' to leave their home implies that previously they were NOT allowed. Was that the case? I am not aware that anyone HAD to stay indoors at all times. But that cannot surely be true.

And 12 weeks is not up.

 

[Wolf]

I’d point to the excess deaths figures and beg to differ. The vast majority of governments around the world have done better, some of them massively so.

I appreciate the need to rally round and help the country get out of this mess but let’s not do so at the cost of ignoring the unpleasant truth of how we got here.

I can't agree with that point because the truth of the matter is we don't know factually if other nations have done far better. The reporting structure isn't standard for each country, if we'd followed a similar system of reporting to many other nations our numbers could well look better or theirs worse if they reported in same manner we do.. So i just don't buy into they've failed because our death toll is higher than other nations, its not comparable as its not consistent.

As much as there have been concerns with some of their handling of certain situations Dom, PPE & testing Numbers. They have equally acted in best interests of nation in many other ways with furlough, prioritising the more vulnerable etc.. There is no way to say any other party or government would have dealt with it better, fairer or achieved lower numbers of deaths.

It's not ignoring the unpleasant truth either as that's there for all to see, its easy in hindsight for other parties to state what they'd have done differently, but fact is they didn't do enough to get into power and the government we have, have been dealing with the situations as they arise as best they see fit. That's all we can ask of any government in times like this, we can then pass judgement at the next GE..

 

[rulefan]

[QUOTE="Wolf, post: 2184327, member: 25167"The reporting structure isn't standard for each country, if we'd followed a similar system of reporting to many other nations our numbers could well look better or theirs worse if they reported in same manner we do.. [/QUOTE]
That is it exactly.
How are deaths and influencing factors recorded on the death certificate? How are they coded? How are they analysed and reported?
The ONS (as it is now) is probably far more sophisticated than most of the row.

 

[SocketRocket]

I could not tell you the new rules other than at a guess. I believe many are in the same position. We continue to stick pretty solidly to the rules as they were at the outset.

My question in respect of the elderly and vulnerable was around the idea that over 70s and vulnerable were subject to the same guidance - stay at home and be shielded from the virus for 12 weeks. If I am wrong then I didn't understand the difference.

Now I hear that one or both of the over 70s and most vulnerable groups are 'allowed' to leave their home. By saying they are 'allowed' to leave their home implies that previously they were NOT allowed. Was that the case? I am not aware that anyone HAD to stay indoors at all times. But that cannot surely be true.

And 12 weeks is not up.

The detail has been there for anyone to see and broadcast continually, I cant see why you dont understand them when you are normally so interested in the detail of such subjects.

The group that have been told to stay at home and be 'shielded' are people with certain underlying medical conditions, these people have been informed by letter. Those over 70 without serious medical conditions have not been informed by letter but have been advised they can leave home but should take particular care to avoid contact with others.

 

[Old Skier]

The detail has been there for anyone to see and broadcast continually, I cant see why you dont understand them when you are normally so interested in the detail of such subjects.

The group that have been told to stay at home and be 'shielded' are people with certain underlying medical conditions, these people have been informed by letter. Those over 70 without serious medical conditions have not been informed by letter but have been advised they can leave home but should take particular care to avoid contact with others.

For someone who spends so much time on the web it's strange that others have to continually point him in the right direction. Anyone who is truly interested, the correct information is out there.

 

[SocketRocket]

I find it hard to understand why so many are pushing a hard political party policy with Covid, we keep seeing people saying that the government should have done this or that differently, other countries have been good at dealing with it and we are bad, our death rates are high and others are low but most of this talk is horribly biased and prone to use dodgy statistics. Its absolutely wrong to manipulate the information to satisfy your political preferences.

I keep seeing people going on about how higher our death rate is compared to other countries without any consideration of population density, if you study a graph showing deaths per million of population you will see most countries follow a much similar curve on a graph. Even this method doesnt give a fair comparison, population density is bound to be a factor, London with 9.3 million people in such a small area will have a massive influence.

I know it's not a competition and that's the point I make, there will be a trade off between control of the virus and reviving the ecconomy and that has to be great a concern for Governments when deciding what to do next. I'm just glad I dont have to make these decisions but also that some of the others who like to make a pastime at complaining dont either.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I'm certainly not claiming any particular party would have definitely have handled it any better. What I am disputing is the claim that our government has "done a great job" because any objective analysis shows that is patently untrue. I don't want to be too damning because I recognise the critical mistakes were made at the onset of the pandemic which effectively locked in the horrific death toll and their response improved since then and has been a mixture of good and bad. But mistakes were made that cost thousands of lives and that should not be swept under the carpet.

I’m looking at the overall picture, totally agree the death toll is horrific, regardless of counting method, 1 death was 1 too many.

I’m looking at measures they’ve taken for the people, for business’s etc as well.

I’d like to believe at this point that all and every measure they’ve taken have been to save lives and look after us all, Yes, they’ve made mistakes and at times needed a kick up the backside, I’ve never advocated waiting until this is over for them to learn, they had, to and they did, adjust on route.

I just fail at this time, without all the facts, to see what they could of done differently at the time to save thousands of lives, that sort of information will only come out when the enquiry takes place.

 

[SocketRocket]

I'm certainly not claiming any particular party would have definitely have handled it any better. What I am disputing is the claim that our government has "done a great job" because any objective analysis shows that is patently untrue. I don't want to be too damning because I recognise the critical mistakes were made at the onset of the pandemic which effectively locked in the horrific death toll and their response improved since then and has been a mixture of good and bad. But mistakes were made that cost thousands of lives and that should not be swept under the carpet.

Hindsight, it's a great attribute.
I dont see anyone saying 'Our Government has done a great job' only people using the phrase as a party political blunt instrument, like you just have. Does anyone believe we have a government that wanted a high death rate or that the whole UK machine is somehow faulty and inferior to most other countries.

Time will tell what the rights and wrongs are and what lessons can be learned but something that has become evident to me is we now live in a society that is always looking for blame and division, even in places where it doesnt really exist and this is creating hugely distorted perceptions of reality.

 

[Hacker Khan]

I’m looking at the overall picture, totally agree the death toll is horrific, regardless of counting method, 1 death was 1 too many.

I’m looking at measures they’ve taken for the people, for business’s etc as well.

I’d like to believe at this point that all and every measure they’ve taken have been to save lives and look after us all, Yes, they’ve made mistakes and at times needed a kick up the backside, I’ve never advocated waiting until this is over for them to learn, they had, to and they did, adjust on route.

I just fail at this time, without all the facts, to see what they could of done differently at the time to save thousands of lives, that sort of information will only come out when the enquiry takes place.

Lockdown quicker, get test, trace and track up and running quicker? As they seem to be reoccurring themes form the countries that seem to have handled this better.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Hindsight, it's a great attribute.
I dont see anyone saying 'Our Government has done a great job' only people using the phrase as a party political blunt instrument, like you just have. Does anyone believe we have a government that wanted a high death rate or that the whole UK machine is somehow faulty and inferior to most other countries.

Time will tell what the rights and wrongs are and what lessons can be learned but something that has become evident to me is we now live in a society that is always looking for blame and division, even in places where it doesnt really exist and this is creating hugely distorted perceptions of reality.

I said it in post #3315.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Lockdown quicker, get test, trace and track up and running quicker? As they seem to be reoccurring themes form the countries that seem to have handled this better.

Hindsight, they didn’t at the time with the advice they were given.

I wish they’d of locked us down at the first sign, cancelled Cheltenham, had more PPE, stopped flights from abroad etc, they didn’t and we need to find out why they took the decisions they did.

Until then.......

 

[Hacker Khan]

Hindsight, they didn’t at the time with the advice they were given.

I wish they’d of locked us down at the first sign, cancelled Cheltenham, had more PPE, stopped flights from abroad etc, they didn’t and we need to find out why they took the decisions they did.

Until then.......

I would argue that that is potentially ignoring the political interpretation of the advice and the competence of the decision makers. I understood we had some of the best scientists in the world in this field, so I am assuming the advice they had was some of the best. So why if we had some of the best advice were we not locking down quicker or prioritizing getting track and trace running? That to me is an issue of competence.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I would argue that that is potentially ignoring the political interpretation of the advice and the competence of the decision makers. I understood we had some of the best scientists in the world in this field, so I am assuming the advice they had was some of the best. So why if we had some of the best advice were we not locking down quicker or prioritizing getting track and trace running? That to me is an issue of competence.

That is a question that needs to be asked, I agree, but until it’s asked and answered, we are guessing, aren’t we?

 

[Wolf]

I'm certainly not claiming any particular party would have definitely have handled it any better. What I am disputing is the claim that our government has "done a great job" because any objective analysis shows that is patently untrue. I don't want to be too damning because I recognise the critical mistakes were made at the onset of the pandemic which effectively locked in the horrific death toll and their response improved since then and has been a mixture of good and bad. But mistakes were made that cost thousands of lives and that should not be swept under the carpet.

Its easy to dispute that though using the wonder of hindsight and inaccuracies of global reporting of figures because you cannot compare what we report to anyone else as nobody is using the same methods. I wouldn't say they done a great job or a poor job they've merely done the job at hand. But you cannot equally say they've done a bad job because other countries report lese deaths, especially as they're not reporting facts the same way.

As I've said there have been mistakes, which they must learn and it won't be swept under the carpet by the voters, that's why we have the GE we get to pass judgement on the government by voting them out next time round. I'd happily see this government voted out as I'm not a fan of Tory governments but they are what we have now and we need to follow their guidance. I can see that in this case for all the mistakes they're equally trying to do what's right for the majority and that's all any government will ever be able to do.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Lockdown quicker, get test, trace and track up and running quicker? As they seem to be reoccurring themes form the countries that seem to have handled this better.

Like South Korea?
Yes, they did well initially but a few days ago there were reports that they have had to re-introduce lockdown because the easing has put up infection rate.
I'm not criticising them, just pointing out that this is unknown territory for all nations, and I think all nations are trying their best as they see it.
I am presently watching the South news about the numpties at the beaches in
Dorset. The silly BBC are still wittering on about the government message not being clear in the face if their reports showing how the people at those beaches are not giving a damn about SD , or respect for local residents, or the beach( rubbish strewn anywhere) etc.
Clearly, they know what they should or should not do, but they are doing whatever they want, and fingers up to the lockdown requirements, whatever easement stage they are at.
For so many, summer's here, and the virus isn't.

 

[SocketRocket]

Paul did, which was what prompted my reply. I am not being party political on this in any way and I resent the accusation. I have praised the government on this thread where it was merited. I am merely commenting on the situation and each aspect of it as I see it

And of course I don't think they wanted a high death rate. What a ridiculous thing to say. They made some massive mistakes early on that have proven very costly. It's reasonable to be able to point that out without being called out for it by partisans such as yourself.

I do owe you an apology. I have Paul on 'Ignore' so dont see his posts, this does sometimes create a disjointing in some threads, your post came over in a different context.
Again, my apologies.

 

[GB72]

This article has a different take on things. I have no idea about this magazine so no idea what, if any, political bias it may have or how extreme in the political spectrum it is but was interesting

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-lockdowns-founding-myth/

Ok looking it up it is right wing biased but still interesting