How Much Longer Are People Going To Meekly Roll Over And Accept These Draconian Rules?

[dave50]

The damage being done to our economy is incalculable yet I see people in the street being interviewed on the news saying they accept it and its nessasary and they will comply and some saying it doesn't go far enough. Do these people understand how the economy works? I seriously doubt it. The only people who dare mildly disagree are the business owners of bars and restaurants who are in real danger of having to close down permanently. When the tsunami of unemployed start rolling down the track after furlough is ended, these same people who are calling for the lock down to continue will then be blaming the government for the increase in unemployment. I really do despair.

[bhg481]

The trouble is, if you don't roll over and accept these draconian rules, you might end up in Intensive Care when you won't be able to roll anywhere.

[New Judge]

//...you might end up in Intensive Care when you won't be able to roll anywhere.//

Yes you might. But then again you might not.

At present there are around 16,000 people in hospital with Covid and 1,400 of those on mechanical ventilation. About 2.3% of the population have tested positive for the virus meaning 97.7% have not. I'll leave you to do the sums.

[THECORBYLOON]

What percentage of the population has been tested?

[Sqad]

///////At present there are around 16,000 people in hospital with Covid and 1,400 of those on mechanical ventilation. ///

and still rising.

[Ken4155]

NJ, and what percentage of the population have walked around carrying the virus but have not been tested? Your figures mean absolutely nothing.

[naomi24]

Of a population of going on 67 million, that^ doesn't seem so terrible - especially bearing in mind that by far the majority of deaths occur to elderly people - average age 82 I understand - with pre-existing medical conditions who die 'with' the virus rather than 'from' it. A sense of proportion needs to be observed ... urgently.

[Sqad]

Ken,
NJ's figures are correct,but it is their interpretation that is open to questions.

[diddlydo]

I'm retired and comfortably off but I'd be a great deal more comfortable (nothing to do with money) if I could behave in a more normal fashion. The law-abiding are being unreasonably punished for the selfishness of the few who can't be trusted to be reasonably sensible.

[mushroom25]

what's likely to happen in England after lockdown/tiers are eased at Christmas can be pretty much estimated based on the Welsh experience.
Firebreak = showed positive results.
Release = virus starts spreading again = more restrictions
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/coronavirus-wales-mark-drakeford-christmas-19355104

it's a virus, and it will spread. it will keep spreading until it runs out of victims to infect. people will meet up, even if only in the legally sanctioned arenas of essential shops, the workplace, schools, colleges and transport, and it only takes a second's inattention with an unsanitised hand to face, mask, door handle, etc.

if the government policy is intended to mark time until a vaccine is available, then lockdowns and other restrictions will be with us for a good while yet. they are not going to eliminate the virus - only a 100% curfew for weeks will accomplish that.

[NickorWan]

Those figures from NJ seem to imply that should the other 97.7% get the virus we could have around 700,000 hospital cases.

[New Judge]

//NJ, and what percentage of the population have walked around carrying the virus but have not been tested? Your figures mean absolutely nothing.//

Quite a lot I imagine. I expect there are large numbers of people walking round with the virus completely unaware that they have it. Which demonstrates that it is only dangerous to a very small percentage of the population. And that begs the question why the entire country is under severe restrictions when only a minority need protection. But that has been the theme of my argument throughout. The answer is because it’s easier to lock everybody away from everybody else than it is to devise some practical targeted protection. The downside is that the economy gets destroyed and deaths from non-Covid related causes soar. But never mind about that. Similarly it is easier to place entire counties in the same “Tier” of restrictions than it is to devise a more local system where restrictions appropriate to the infection levels are imposed. This means that in Kent restaurants and pubs are shut in Thanet (infections 485 per 100,000) as are those in Tunbridge Wells (103). The two areas are 60 miles apart with no direct public transport links and no common centres of interest. It also means that the village of Groombridge has a pub at one end of the High Street which can open and one at the other end which cannot. This is because the border between Kent and East Sussex passes through the village. But never mind about that lunacy either. But we should because it is because of that and similar lunacy that the regulations are being mocked and will probably be ignored. After all, the people of Groombridge will ask why they can go into the Junction Inn but they cannot go into The Crown, which is literally 200 metres away. Especially when they all use the same shops in the village. As well as that the Junction Inn may just about survive this nonsense but The Crown may well go under. But never mind about that either, I suppose. In fact there seems to be quite a lot of things that don't really matter.

[NickorWan]

//Quite a lot I imagine. I expect there are large numbers of people walking round with the virus completely unaware that they have it. Which demonstrates that it is only dangerous to a very small percentage of the population. //

Well to be fair, it demonstrates what you imagine and what you expect.

[dave50]

So it does seem, as I thought, that those with no financial worries are the ones who shout loudest for the lockdown to continue .

[bobbinwales]

So what do you think you'll achieve by continuing blaming pensioners and those not working for supporting lockdown dave . Its the scientists and your elected goverments you need to winge at but your wasting your breath as the vast majority know the reality that we need seveer restriction's until we get a vaccinne as we cant afford to lose control. Chill, accept it. Do your bit and help control it and protect are NHS and save lives. Simple.

[Peter Pedant]

\\ About 2.3% of the population have tested positive for the meaning 97.7% have not. I'll leave you to do the sums.\\

when you can add - that is ! - the judiciary, clearly maff CSE not reqd.
( see the trigger of asbestosis cases and judges getting their wiggies truly knotted, so knotted they have to decline to follow the previous cases)

97.7 % the pop testing negative of 60 m and I thought the testers have been working hard. No they havent - it is a sample and not a population - so we predict the population rate from the sample

and who has been in the forefront of saying that prediction is no sign of the true situation ? why one - - ......

gentlemen of the jury, his honour has been caught out talking booloo once and is this another ....[instance of a fact is a fact when he needs it and complete crap when he doesnt]

anyway taking the sample as representing the population
it was once 0.6% and now four months later it is 2.4 which oh dear is quadruple in six monf and so doubles every 3 monf or 60 d

so we know that r > 1 for most of that time - - oh dear - not really what we wanted at all, I wonder if NJ will resile from his position

and no lock down ? the experiment is being done stateside as we write ! Mystic Meg says "hundreds of thousands of death s- or not - the runes have been cast...." we wait for the result