Honey, Lemons, And Ginger To Make A...
Food & Drink1 min ago
Madness Persists
https:/
Forget your summer holidays.
A 4th surge with inevitable lockdown is a racing certainty despite the successful vaccination programme.
Don't blame the Politicians.
Forget your summer holidays.
A 4th surge with inevitable lockdown is a racing certainty despite the successful vaccination programme.
Don't blame the Politicians.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Sqad. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Don't blame the politicians ? If politicians create a situation where the public feel they need to exercise their right to protest, then that's where the blame must lie.
If this virus is going to be around in the long term we must, as a species, get used to living normally with it, not hide ourselves away forevermore. Well past time that it should have been managed sufficiently to allow us to be at that stage.
Meanwhile, this bill they're protesting about seems very much the Curate's Egg. Society needs control of wayward members but not at the cost of victimising decent citizens. Hardly surprising there's dissent and protest.
If this virus is going to be around in the long term we must, as a species, get used to living normally with it, not hide ourselves away forevermore. Well past time that it should have been managed sufficiently to allow us to be at that stage.
Meanwhile, this bill they're protesting about seems very much the Curate's Egg. Society needs control of wayward members but not at the cost of victimising decent citizens. Hardly surprising there's dissent and protest.
Have these people no sense of irony?
Curbs are being put in place to stop riots, resulting in a riot to protest about the curbs. Effing idiots.
I note the reports state it all started peacefully, and then descended into a riot. This happened at the BLM riots last Summer and the vigil last week too.
Why is this? Is it a feeling of anonymity in numbers, or are the protests soon joined by the rent-a-mob lot who riot over anything and just enjoy a bit of a dust-up?
Curbs are being put in place to stop riots, resulting in a riot to protest about the curbs. Effing idiots.
I note the reports state it all started peacefully, and then descended into a riot. This happened at the BLM riots last Summer and the vigil last week too.
Why is this? Is it a feeling of anonymity in numbers, or are the protests soon joined by the rent-a-mob lot who riot over anything and just enjoy a bit of a dust-up?
There seems to be a strange phenomenon, a spirit of the age (Zeitgeist) everywhere, & not all to do with the pandemic. In the last few months there has been demos & riots all around the globe: USA, Russia, Myanmar, France, London, Hong Kong, Berlin, - the list goes on,
Why is this, is it because mass communication has become so easy via social media & phones, or is there some kind of mass hysteria taking place throughout humanity?
Why is this, is it because mass communication has become so easy via social media & phones, or is there some kind of mass hysteria taking place throughout humanity?
//OK dave vaccine is not 100% effective and what happens when a different strain mutates?//
Are you suggesting, Tony, that we live our lives like this indefinitely? Because you are quite correct - the vaccine does not provide 100% immunity and new strains will always develop. The virus will not be wiped from the face of the Earth. It will always exist, as do the descendants of of earlier epidemics of 1968, 1957 and even 1918.
If you're not suggesting we live like this indefinitely, with all the associated non-Covid damage that has been well discussed here and elsewhere, what are you suggesting?
Are you suggesting, Tony, that we live our lives like this indefinitely? Because you are quite correct - the vaccine does not provide 100% immunity and new strains will always develop. The virus will not be wiped from the face of the Earth. It will always exist, as do the descendants of of earlier epidemics of 1968, 1957 and even 1918.
If you're not suggesting we live like this indefinitely, with all the associated non-Covid damage that has been well discussed here and elsewhere, what are you suggesting?
//What are YOU suggesting?//
I'm suggesting that the PM's "roadmap" (something that would previously have been known as a "plan") is adhered to as an absolute minimum. In fact I'd suggest it being revisited in view of the huge success of the vaccination programme and the enormous reduction in deaths and hospital admissions, with a view to bringing forward some of the easing of restrictions it contains.
We're moving stealthily but noticeably towards "we'd better not ease restrictions in case it all flares up again." TonyV's answer was indicative of this, hence my question. We know the vaccine is not 100% effective and we know that new strains will emerge. I'd agree that this lockdown might now as well remain until the most vulnerable have had two jabs and most of the less vulnerable have had one. But the programme is now down to inviting those over 50 and those extremely clinically vulnerable. Something like 97% of all Covid deaths have been among those aged over 50 and very few of those had no underlying health problems. Whilst any death is regrettable, is it really practical, let alone desirable or sustainable, to keep the country in torpor in order to try to prevent such a small number of casualties?
It is clear that the natives are getting restless. It is also clear that continued restrictions are having an enormous impact on the country in terms of the economy and non-Covid health. There should be no question that all restrictions should be lifted as quickly as possible. But I am worried that people who say "we can't be too careful" (when in fact we can) are beginning to dominate the Twittersphere. If they do then the undoubted success of the vaccine rollout will be in vain.
I'm suggesting that the PM's "roadmap" (something that would previously have been known as a "plan") is adhered to as an absolute minimum. In fact I'd suggest it being revisited in view of the huge success of the vaccination programme and the enormous reduction in deaths and hospital admissions, with a view to bringing forward some of the easing of restrictions it contains.
We're moving stealthily but noticeably towards "we'd better not ease restrictions in case it all flares up again." TonyV's answer was indicative of this, hence my question. We know the vaccine is not 100% effective and we know that new strains will emerge. I'd agree that this lockdown might now as well remain until the most vulnerable have had two jabs and most of the less vulnerable have had one. But the programme is now down to inviting those over 50 and those extremely clinically vulnerable. Something like 97% of all Covid deaths have been among those aged over 50 and very few of those had no underlying health problems. Whilst any death is regrettable, is it really practical, let alone desirable or sustainable, to keep the country in torpor in order to try to prevent such a small number of casualties?
It is clear that the natives are getting restless. It is also clear that continued restrictions are having an enormous impact on the country in terms of the economy and non-Covid health. There should be no question that all restrictions should be lifted as quickly as possible. But I am worried that people who say "we can't be too careful" (when in fact we can) are beginning to dominate the Twittersphere. If they do then the undoubted success of the vaccine rollout will be in vain.
Latest Posts
News7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles9 mins ago
Body & Soul17 mins ago
ChatterBank18 mins ago
Only The A F D Can Save Germany
News19 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.