Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak

[Inverted]

Historically, in most countries, Middle England types are exactly who far-right movements draw their core support from. Nazism for example was sustained in its early days by a very intense, disproportionately middle-class following - respectable people like minor professionals and small business owners. Not that these people are as bad as Nazis or even close.

The most commited believers in far-right conspiracism are generally people who are sufficiently low down that they can feel oppressed by someone, but just high up enough that they don't want to be treated like the rest of the rabble. 

[The Artful Dodger]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

Historically, in most countries, Middle England types are exactly who far-right movements draw their core support from. Nazism for example was sustained in its early days by a very intense, disproportionately middle-class following - respectable people like minor professionals and small business owners. Not that these people are as bad as Nazis or even close.

The most commited believers in far-right conspiracism are generally people who are sufficiently low down that they can feel oppressed by someone, but just high up enough that they don't want to be treated like the rest of the rabble. 

It appeals to the aspirant who’ve had a recent down turn in luck. Far right politics are sadly on the rise and it’s not helped by a government who pander to the crudest anti immigrant rhetoric.

[Danny]

1 hour ago, Inverted said:

Historically, in most countries, Middle England types are exactly who far-right movements draw their core support from. Nazism for example was sustained in its early days by a very intense, disproportionately middle-class following - respectable people like minor professionals and small business owners. Not that these people are as bad as Nazis or even close.

The most commited believers in far-right conspiracism are generally people who are sufficiently low down that they can feel oppressed by someone, but just high up enough that they don't want to be treated like the rest of the rabble. 

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/international/articles-reports/2018/12/14/brexit-and-trump-voters-are-more-likely-believe-co
 

Its no surprise the vaccine conspiracy theories are gaining so much traction, if this was happening in day 99/2000 there definitely wouldn’t be this much distrust. Vaccine programmes suffering from the effects out political class losing the trust that was in them.

[LFCMike]

What are we expecting this week in terms of new measures? 'We're not closing hospitality but we recommend that you don't go to pubs and restaurants'?

[The Artful Dodger]

3 hours ago, LFCMike said:

What are we expecting this week in terms of new measures? 'We're not closing hospitality but we recommend that you don't go to pubs and restaurants'?

Sounds like that might be the case, outside service only perhaps.

Edited December 20, 2021 by The Artful Dodger

[Ploughendplonker]

Don't mean to sound too much of a cynic but some are going to wonder what the point was in getting the vaccine if more restrictions come in. It was promised it was the path to freedom, but suggestions of further restrictions show this isn't the case.  Not going full Le Tiss here, I've had my first two and have booked in my third after Christmas, but if I'm going to get my third with restrictions either in or incoming, it will be the equivalent of me attending an interview to become Duncan Goodhew's barber.

[RandoEFC+]

A legitimate question has to be answered here. When do the government stop asking fully vaccinated people to restrict their lives to protect the unvaccinated, and protect the NHS from being overwhelmed by unvaccinated patients?

Is it a legitimate comparison to compare it to smoking? Another time where people knowingly make an unhealthy decision and increase their risk of needing treatment from the NHS, so they are taxed on their purchase to generate more revenue for the health service. Is it moral and/or practical to start levying some sort of tax or charge on people who haven't had the vaccine unless they have a legitimate exemption? Probably not, and it probably sets a dangerous precedent, but if we've ended up in a place where people are told the vaccine was the nucleus of our exit strategy here and people are still not given full freedom after 3 jabs, what other route can you take to prevent this from happening every winter and every time the virus mutates (which it's currently doing at a rate of one troublesome mutation roughly every 6 months)?

[Batard]

I have zero belief in the political system in the United Kingdom. All COVID has amplified is the power of party backers/donors to make money from government at the expense of the taxpayer. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

17 minutes ago, RondónEFC said:

A legitimate question has to be answered here. When do the government stop asking fully vaccinated people to restrict their lives to protect the unvaccinated, and protect the NHS from being overwhelmed by unvaccinated patients?

Is it a legitimate comparison to compare it to smoking? Another time where people knowingly make an unhealthy decision and increase their risk of needing treatment from the NHS, so they are taxed on their purchase to generate more revenue for the health service. Is it moral and/or practical to start levying some sort of tax or charge on people who haven't had the vaccine unless they have a legitimate exemption? Probably not, and it probably sets a dangerous precedent, but if we've ended up in a place where people are told the vaccine was the nucleus of our exit strategy here and people are still not given full freedom after 3 jabs, what other route can you take to prevent this from happening every winter and every time the virus mutates (which it's currently doing at a rate of one troublesome mutation roughly every 6 months)?

It's a good question. I, obviously, don't have the answer - and I don't think any of us on here will.

But I think society is at a tipping point because so many people, myself included, are fed up with all of these extra rules put on us for the sake of protecting people that've had almost a year to go get their jabs. And now we're seeing the surge of a variant that is spreading like wildfire regardless of whether people are vaccinated or not - and while we're seeing that people who were fully vaccinated are much more likely to recover quickly (and fully)... it does beg the question: what's the point of all of this if we can all still get it?

Why should we put restrictions on our lives when there's people who've decided they will take the calculated risk of getting the virus without protection, simply because those people - who've taken that risk - may be put in more precarious health positions than those who haven't taken that risk? At what point do we accept that people have taken a risk and let them live with the consequences of that risk?

For me, I feel a bit callous in saying it, but that time is now. Anyone, vaccinated or not can get the illness, so with the vast majority of people we're talking about people who've willingly decided to go about life taking the maximum possible risk with COVID.

But as a counterpoint, I think a good reason to continue with restrictions despite most unvaccinated people having willingly taken that risk is: to protect young children. Because young children aren't able to get the vaccine just yet - in many places it hasn't been approved for children of lower ages. Should they risk getting an illness that can potentially last a long time/can leave long term effects (some of which we don't really understand fully yet) that can potentially last the rest of their lives, just because we as a society have utterly failed at working together as a global community to stop the virus spreading?

I'm not so sure that young children should be put at risk. At the same time, I'm not sure we should be protecting adults from the risks they've decided to take.

So, like I said... it's a good question!

[Dr. Gonzo]

6 minutes ago, Batard said:

I have zero belief in the political system in the United Kingdom. All COVID has amplified is the power of party backers/donors to make money from government at the expense of the taxpayer. 

I'd already lost much faith in the political system of the UK. And subsequently with Brexit and COVID... I'm feeling like my plans to move back home anytime in the next few years are pretty much dead. I don't really have regrets in moving away from home anymore.

Granted, I've moved to the US and my already shaky faith in the US political system has been similarly been eroded to how I felt about the UK.

Maybe I'll try Canada or Germany next.

[Tommy]

9 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Maybe I'll try Canada or Germany next.

Just because we're legalizing weed? 

[Ploughendplonker]

11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's a good question. I, obviously, don't have the answer - and I don't think any of us on here will.

But I think society is at a tipping point because so many people, myself included, are fed up with all of these extra rules put on us for the sake of protecting people that've had almost a year to go get their jabs. And now we're seeing the surge of a variant that is spreading like wildfire regardless of whether people are vaccinated or not - and while we're seeing that people who were fully vaccinated are much more likely to recover quickly (and fully)... it does beg the question: what's the point of all of this if we can all still get it?

Why should we put restrictions on our lives when there's people who've decided they will take the calculated risk of getting the virus without protection, simply because those people - who've taken that risk - may be put in more precarious health positions than those who haven't taken that risk? At what point do we accept that people have taken a risk and let them live with the consequences of that risk?

For me, I feel a bit callous in saying it, but that time is now. Anyone, vaccinated or not can get the illness, so with the vast majority of people we're talking about people who've willingly decided to go about life taking the maximum possible risk with COVID.

But as a counterpoint, I think a good reason to continue with restrictions despite most unvaccinated people having willingly taken that risk is: to protect young children. Because young children aren't able to get the vaccine just yet - in many places it hasn't been approved for children of lower ages. Should they risk getting an illness that can potentially last a long time/can leave long term effects (some of which we don't really understand fully yet) that can potentially last the rest of their lives, just because we as a society have utterly failed at working together as a global community to stop the virus spreading?

I'm not so sure that young children should be put at risk. At the same time, I'm not sure we should be protecting adults from the risks they've decided to take.

So, like I said... it's a good question!

As eluded to I'm pro-vaccine (indeed I haven't come across anyone who is hesitant about it), however the scapegoating of those who haven't got the vaccine is so widespread I'm surprised they haven't been blamed for our poor performances in the Ashes so far. 

I get that it can reduce transmission but vaccines don't stop people getting it, the idea of the vaccine is if you do get it, it either doesn't affect you or at worst is similar to a bad bout of flu or cold. As a result cases, which is being used as the reason for further restrictions, are always going to be at a reasonably high level even if, hypothetically, the whole population was vaccinated. 

Trouble is there's no opposition to it. Labour are pro-control of society so are always going to vote for more restrictions at every turn. It's in the media's interest to be pro-lockdown as it means that more people will be at home reading their articles, meaning they can earn more money from advertisers. I imagine this is why the only questioning of lockdown during this whole process has been along the lines of 'why didn't we lock down harder' or 'why didn't we lock down sooner'. That's why SAGE can go on TV and say unsubstantiated guff like 'if we'd locked down a week earlier we would've saved 20,000 lives' or similar and no interviewer will dare challenge them. 

[Guest]

Anyone else had a hard job booking their booster? When I've done it the system keeps crashing 

[Honey Honey]

22 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Anyone else had a hard job booking their booster? When I've done it the system keeps crashing 

Go to a walk in mate. I couldn't find any good times for booking a jab at the GP, popped down the walk in yesterday afternoon, no queues at all, straight in.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Honey Honey said:

Go to a walk in mate. I couldn't find any good times for booking a jab at the GP, popped down the walk in yesterday afternoon, no queues at all, straight in.

Ow right might try that. Need to get it done because I'm not able to get furlough this time  if we get a lock down . Might need to work on a care home kitchen and you need to have a booster 

[Stan]

54 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Anyone else had a hard job booking their booster? When I've done it the system keeps crashing 

When Boris announced last week about the new targets it was jam packed and the site broke.

Managed to get one for tomorrow, though, where I am. Had a decent amount of availability. 

[Stan]

When you think of the shit that previous ministers get for muddling up their figures... 

 

 

[Tommy]

32 minutes ago, Stan said:

When you think of the shit that previous ministers get for muddling up their figures... 

 

 

10 Omicron cases, 100 deaths. That is a very deadly variant. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

5 hours ago, Tommy said:

Just because we're legalizing weed? 

Is German weed good? I didn’t know it’s being legalised there but that’s definitely compelling 

[Rucksackfranzose]

19 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Is German weed good? I didn’t know it’s being legalised there but that’s definitely compelling 

Same quality as the Dutch one.

[Dr. Gonzo]

I tested positive just now 

[Inverted]

I'm quite concerned that any effort to reintroduce lockdown measures is going to lead to complete rejection of the whole pandemic response.

The response is too incomplete and arbitrary to really be taken seriously, and people are smart enough to remember last year, when a tiny circuit-breaker turned into almost a whole extra year of complete lockdown. People are really starting to feel like they're being taken for a ride.

You run the risk that a lot of people think "what's the point in getting the booster if it doesn't avoid lockdowns?". And then we are really going to be in trouble. 

Even I started to feel a bit unbothered for a while about getting my booster, although I eventually managed to get an appointment. My girlfriend got hers from her dad, since both of her parents are GPs, and they were all confused as to why I hadn't gotten mine yet - they didn't fully understand that most people don't know any doctors, and normal people have to book appointments and might be limited in choice of timeslots by work, etc.

Which, although they meant well, I think is the kind of attitude from the professional middle-class that I think illustrates the whole divide between the kind of people who make the decisions, and the normal people who need to live with those decisions. 

Edited December 21, 2021 by Inverted

[Bluebird Hewitt]

Well this must be on par with the non essential bollocks Drakeford spouted out last year.

If you don't work from home in Wales where possible from Monday, you'll be fined £60, with employers fined £1,000 as well.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-59741680

Really can't make this up, but no doubt the sheep (pun intended) will lap this up like they always do with anything Drakeford does, especially the likes of Walesonline.

[RandoEFC+]

All the arguments are doing my head in now to he honest.

Shock horror that after 2-3 days of "will they, won't they" leaks over the Covid restrictions, Mr Blobby makes a grand announcement today that there will be no restrictions before Christmas. All so the Mail and Express can plaster "Boris defies doomsday Sage Marxists to save Christmas" on tomorrow's front pages.

What a truly pathetic man he is. Maybe he'll get a little polling boost for a week or two to make the uncertainty faced by the little people worthwhile.

Anyway, I got my booster at a walk in today. Every little helps.

[LFCMike]

5 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I tested positive just now 

Hope it's not too bad