Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Bert Raccoon]

2 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The Star, voice of the nation

So many questions, so little time 

[Wee Bully]

Someone is going to wake up in the morning with a stinking headache, and a sinking feeling in their stomach as they wonder “WTF did I say”.

 

This is Kincy levels of pishedness

 

[vikingTON]

8 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

Good luck if you can afford to give up 2 weeks wages immediately after Christmas. Again total Ivory Towers stuff for the huge majority. Your lack of awareness to real life continues to astound.

If you've been fortunate enough to be employed over the past year then you will likely be much better off now than at any previous Christmas beforehand. The savings figures for the UK this year speak for themselves. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of people have already been chucked onto the necessity of food banks and £80 a week Universal Credit because of you beloved 'keep schools open, burn the rest down' policy so forgive me if I don't feel too much concern that full-time wage earners might have a dodgy month instead. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by vikingTON

[Wee Bully]

If you've been fortunate enough to be employed over the past year then you will likely be much better off now than at any previous Christmas beforehand. The savings figures for the UK this year speak for themselves. Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of people have already been chucked onto the necessity of food banks and £80 a week Universal Credit so forgive me if I don't feel too much concern that full-time wage earners might have a dodgy month instead. 

So, have you lost your job, and are now on £80 a week UC?

If so, I will back the f*** away and apologise for winding you up. I know this has been hard on a lot of us, some more than others.

[101]

14 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The Star, voice of the nation

I assume that's all one story down the left hand side 

[BFTD]

I work in a branch of the CS and an email was sent out last week (or thereabouts) advising that work from home for CS staff would continue until, at the earliest, April, so I can see this one being plausible (assuming you're not in a position whereby you can WFH). Obviously that's comparing apples with oranges a wee bit, but gives an indication of when the government thinks things might start (meaningfully) calming back down. 

Interesting. I'm actually one of the few who could work from home, and offered to, but apparently nobody below middle-management is to work as the paperwork would just be too difficult.

(As usual, admin can't be arsed, in other words)

[Cheese]

Like it or not, the government made the decision to prioritise children's education and the political constituency of working families over the hospitality industry and single folk who like to go for a pint.

Was this the correct decision with regards to completely suppressing the virus ?

Probably not.

Was it the correct decision with regards to forthcoming elections and shielding at risk groups whom parents often depend on for childcare ?

Maybe.

It is what it is and I would guess that even with hindsight, they'd still pretty much take almost exactly the same path.

 

[vikingTON]

 

15 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:

So, have you lost your job, and are now on £80 a week UC?

If so, I will back the f*** away and apologise for winding you up. I know this has been hard on a lot of us, some more than others.

No, I just have an awareness that those in the industries left to rot and businesses collapse this year from retail, hospitality, live events to tourism have been overwhelmingly on the receiving end of the economic pain throughout. If they could choose between having to take two weeks' unpaid leave or undertaking childcare and taking their chances with the benefit system in the New Year then I can't see them thinking that the full-time worker's need for extra childcare provision is quite the catastrophic loss that people think it is. 

There are no good, cost-free options on the table but if we're going to be serious about ending this indefinite economic mess then we should be led by pubic health risk first and place inconvenience to sections of the population last - particularly when these groups have been relatively shielded from the worst impacts throughout this year. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by vikingTON

[tamthebam]

4 hours ago, supermik said:

But,but, he might miss out on a higher trigonometry test..

Going off at a tangent, it's a sine of the times and I thought they'd have all angles covered.

[vikingTON]

8 minutes ago, MixuFruit said:

Something very odd about having:

A: Folk sending their kids to school

B: Inadequate Universal Credit

And focusing virtually all your energy and anger on A.

I'm not sure why you keep constantly trying to deflect criticism of the government's handling of the pandemic with references to austerity. The latter is not within the remit of the SG to control nor the political will of the Tories that the 'great' British electorate in their infinite wisdom brought into power to do so. It is however within the scope of the SG to not fold in the face of parents' pressure and so manage a public health issue more effectively and the two are not even remotely connected to each other.

Perhaps you should start a Universal Credit thread on the Politics forum if you want to rail against its injustice later, but the energy and anger should absolutely be targeted at this country's horrendous handling of the pandemic right now.

Edited December 21, 2020 by vikingTON

[MP_MFC]

I see the Times reporting that the government were advised that the reasonable worst case scenario is 700k cases a day by February..BEFORE they found out about the new variant.

Under what planet would that be a reasonable scenario? It's predictions and modelling like this that has caused many to totally disregard the science.

[Fullerene]

4 minutes ago, tamthebam said:

Going off at a tangent, it's a sine of the times and I thought they'd have all angles covered.

Ha ha.  I get that one acutely.

[Wee Bully]

I'm not sure why you keep constantly trying to deflect criticism of the government's handling of the pandemic with references to austerity. The latter is not within the remit of the SG to control nor the political will of the Tories that the 'great' British electorate in their infinite wisdom brought into power to do so. It is however within the scope of the SG to not fold in the face of parents' pressure and make a public health issue more effectively and the two are not even remotely connected to each other.
Perhaps you should start a Universal Credit thread on the Politics forum if you want to rail against its injustice later, but the energy and anger should absolutely be targeted at this country's horrendous handling of the pandemic right now.

Except, many of us think they might have stuffed some bits up (care homes for instance) but not been “horrendous”.

Difficult times lead to difficult choices.

You, within the space of a couple of days, seem to want us to close down the schools (hard line get rid of the virus), and let parts of the country carry on as they wish (soft as shite on the virus)

You are the picture of inconsistency, driven by positions you took months ago, and which you will defend to the hilt because you think that you need to “win the internet”.

[Jambomo]

 

38 minutes ago, virginton said:

Actually no you don't - businesses suspend 'normal' annual leave for seasonal peak times all the time. 

 

You can’t suspend it for some employees and let parents take it. That would be highly discriminatory. 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

VT tying himself into a Gordian knot tonight.

 

Never thought I'd see that.

[Rob1885]

I see the Times reporting that the government were advised that the reasonable worst case scenario is 700k cases a day by February..BEFORE they found out about the new variant.

Under what planet would that be a reasonable scenario? It's predictions and modelling like this that has caused many to totally disregard the science.

I see Professor Ferguson is back in the fold so this sort of modelling being reported does not surprise me.

[NotThePars]

40 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

VT tying himself into a Gordian knot tonight.

 

Never thought I'd see that.

if vT's Boromir at the end of the Fellowship then this is Daryl in the cinema 

[Monkey Tennis]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Erm no, the SG instructed schools to prepare for the need for blended learning before changing course and doubling down on the schools stay open at all costs approach late in the summer. There's no evidence to suggest that the technology failed to deliver - the decision was party political. Swinney was taking a battering over the exams fiasco and so caved in on the schools. And so here we are.  

Your timeline is all over the place here.

Blended learning was indeed the plan from about the 10th of June, but the decision for schools to return on a pretty much full scale basis was reached on the 23rd of June - hardly late summer and about six weeks ahead of the early August "exams fiasco".

[itzdrk]

4 hours ago, Aufc said:

 

The thing is there is probably no way to ensure everyone is happy. I don’t really get the hate for parents who want to send their kids to school or whatever. Speaking from experience, it is pretty tough having to occupy young children 24 hours a day 7 days a week especially in lockdown or whatever. On the other side, i can imagine it is rather shite being stuck in a house on your own for that time as well (although after the first few weeks of lockdown i would have been delighted with that for a period).

The virus has affected almost everyone in some form or other.

For the record, i agree with you on the schools. My two are at nursery and there has been no cases in either of their classes. The other class had to close for two weeks but they were all in separate bubbles.

 

That's @Marshmallo bait!

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I see the Times reporting that the government were advised that the reasonable worst case scenario is 700k cases a day by February..BEFORE they found out about the new variant. Under what planet would that be a reasonable scenario? It's predictions and modelling like this that has caused many to totally disregard the science.

 

 

  

They didn’t know about the new variant but they did know about the possibility of new variants and they were writing a worst case scenario

 

 

The new variant that did appear seems to be more infectious but not more deadly so hopefully we’re not looking at the actual worst case just a bad one.

 

the word “reasonable” is referring to the plausibility as opposed to the severity or “acceptability” of it

 

To be honest the year so far has been pretty implausible anyway so the civil service not including Godzilla stomping across the Pennines in a worst case scenario is probably over optimistic